new energy planning not accounting for climate change

[philbob]

Im writing a paper and wanted some other peoples opinion. for my thesis google is not your friend... anyway

My topic is on how the US is only planning for increases in population and not for how the environment will be getting warmer in the contential US, and becuase of that we will enjoy energy surplus near the middle of the century when our new energy infrastructure will supposedly be completed. Alot of my writing is however based off assumptions that green and zero/low emission technology prove to be the producers the powers that be claim them to be.

so if anyone has any comments or know of any online journal articles that would be a great help

thjanks Philbob

 

[Mr. B]

First, 'climate change' science is not a done deal to put it mildly. Any government should have severe reservations about shaping policy on that basis.

Further, I think it's worth mentioning that any government genuinely concerned about air pollution would advocate the use of nuclear power which is totally 'clean' in that regard. Instead, the US government is pussy-footing around with crap like wind and solar power which would not survive in the free market. Massive government subsidies are required.

 

[RoJoHen]

Instead, the US government is pussy-footing around with crap like wind and solar power which would not survive in the free market.

Yeah, but those random giant windmills are kinda fun to look at.

 

[philbob]

If you like to get dizzy. But im not gonna say its real or not im actually more a of skeptic. But for Fraks sake lets say it is and lets think about what bennifitis might exist

 

[sojourner]

There will never be an "energy surplus". Not until it is practically free to produce. If you boil it down everything in the modern world comes down to the energy cost to produce it. Our limited ability to create and store energy is the biggest inhibitor to future growth.

 

[JustAFriend]

new energy planning not accounting for climate change

Maybe they know something you don't.....

 

[T'Girl]

I live in Washington State, 75% of our electricity comes from hydro-electric , 9% is nuclear.

I found this

In 2006 Washington’s Columbia nuclear power plant avoided the emission of

..... 8,500 tons of SO2
.... 15,000 tons of NOx
8,300,000 tons of CO2

If America severely restricted immigration our population growth would slow to a crawl.

If we're willing to accept the environmental footprint there are dozens of possible sites around the country for large hydro-electric dams, hundreds of places for medium size dams.

The President announced the start of two new nuclear plants today.

America's power generation needs to come from a variety of sources. Until a fantastic form of power storage is found, we need generators that work when it's cloudy, when the wind doesn't blow, and when it's night time.