Originally Posted by
CrimsonEclipse
So is whining.
Oooh boy, where do we start on this one. It's like talking to a child.
Here, have some pearls:
Not to cherry pick, but i don't have the time nor crayons to explain to you how silly you sound.
Economically viable: Price per kilowatt hour over the life of the system. (mind blown, right?)
Solar/Wind/Battery/DC power transmission wins every time. It's not even close.
Nukes are economically viable as long as you take all of the laws (i.e. safety) out of the system.
Yeah... keep your "cheap" nukes....
You comparing H2, a fuel, to conventional (chemical) batteries, to capacitors.
They are all VERY different systems, please return when you learn about each of them on the most basic level.
The rest is just babbling....
Frankly, I'm surprised you can dress yourself.
Solar IS the least expensive way to generate power. I don't think anyone is arguing that.
What he's saying is the AMOUNT of solar (and other renewables) required to generate our power needs is astronomical. Especially when you start transitioning transportation infrastructure to electric as well.
Nuclear is very safe, what has made it (somewhat) unsafe is using 1950's design...no new modern nuclear plants have been built.
China and India currently produces 60%+ of their power with coal (and increasing). Replacing that with renewable is a pipe dream. Nuclear would provide instant reductions in smog and contaminates. And it would also provide the needed power without sending people back into caves.