Re: [asa] Psychology, technology, & the sugar-substitute brouhaha

...and windows and arcadia doors. I really wonder about the validity of
the wind generator threat. The ones I've seen in motion don't move all
that fast, but maybe that isn't the problem. JimA [Friend of ASA]

Christine Smith wrote:

>You know what else kills birds? Cars. And tall
>buildings. And cell towers...etc...
>
>Everything has trade-offs, even wind energy. But the
>bottom line is that wind energy (appropriately
>located), on the whole, is better than fossil fuels.
>
>In Christ,
>Christine
>
>--- Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Wind energy (5 cents/kWh) now is on a par with
>>>natural gas. New wind costs the same per kWh as
>>>
>>>
>>new coal (cost of
>>
>>
>>>construction of new plant, depreciated over
>>>
>>>
>>operating lifetime,
>>
>>
>>>allowing for maintenance, not including carbon
>>>
>>>
>>taxes); depreciated
>>
>>
>>>wind costs much less than depreciated coal.
>>>
>>>
>>(Only, there's very
>>
>>
>>>little depreciated wind in the US, since most of
>>>
>>>
>>it has been
>>
>>
>>>installed only recently.)
>>>
>>>
>>And wind turbines kill birds, which eat insects,
>>which otherwise have to
>>be killed with chemicals, which requires coal or oil
>>again.
>>
>>~Dick Fischer
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>[mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
>>Behalf Of Keith Miller
>>Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:53 PM
>>To: asa@lists.calvin.edu
>>Subject: Re: [asa] Psychology, technology, & the
>>sugar-substitute
>>brouhaha
>>
>>I am forwarding this comment from Ruth:
>>
>>Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Thanks. Interesting discussion. Merv's right in
>>>
>>>
>>part; our owning
>>
>>
>>>a Prius makes us sometimes more likely to make
>>>
>>>
>>small trips when we
>>
>>
>>>should wait and combine.
>>>
>>>But:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Realistically, the choices for energy at our
>>>>
>>>>
>>current consumption
>>
>>
>>>>levels is only between dirty choices (all).
>>>>
>>>>
>>Solar would be (is)
>>
>>
>>>>clean, but can't satiate our energy demand in any
>>>>
>>>>
>>substantial
>>
>>
>>>>way. So I don't see oil and solar in any real
>>>>
>>>>
>>competition with
>>
>>
>>>>each other; they are simply different markets --
>>>>
>>>>
>>solar being
>>
>>
>>>>useful to get rid of battery necessity on small
>>>>
>>>>
>>items or prevent
>>
>>
>>>>power companies from having to run lines to
>>>>
>>>>
>>remote communications
>>
>>
>>>>switching devices -- solar shines in those
>>>>
>>>>
>>niches. But when when
>>
>>
>>>>we fill our tanks with gas & want to power large
>>>>
>>>>
>>vehicles at high
>>
>>
>>>>speeds, solar won't cut it. So we choose
>>>>
>>>>
>>between gasoline (or
>>
>>
>>>>maybe ethanol) or for an electric car, coal, or
>>>>
>>>>
>>nuclear. These
>>
>>
>>>>are all dirty in their own way -- nuclear in a
>>>>
>>>>
>>slightly different
>>
>>
>>>>way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I beg to differ. Wind energy (5 cents/kWh) now is
>>>
>>>
>>on a par with
>>
>>
>>>natural gas. New wind costs the same per kWh as
>>>
>>>
>>new coal (cost of
>>
>>
>>>construction of new plant, depreciated over
>>>
>>>
>>operating lifetime,
>>
>>
>>>allowing for maintenance, not including carbon
>>>
>>>
>>taxes); depreciated
>>
>>
>>>wind costs much less than depreciated coal.
>>>
>>>
>>(Only, there's very
>>
>>
>>>little depreciated wind in the US, since most of
>>>
>>>
>>it has been
>>
>>
>>>installed only recently.)
>>>
>>>Solar energy, at 10 cents/kWh, IS competitive with
>>>
>>>
>>other sources in
>>
>>
>>>high-cost environments: CA, HI, Japan. Europe,
>>>
>>>
>>with green-friendly
>>
>>
>>>regulation.
>>>
>>>Finally, the least expensive clean energy is
>>>
>>>
>>CONSERVATION--which is
>>
>>
>>>as green as it gets. I suppose the choice not to
>>>
>>>
>>drive is
>>
>>
>>>conservation in action. And Merv is correct, I
>>>
>>>
>>suspect, that if/
>>
>>
>>>when we reach the stage of plentiful clean energy,
>>>
>>>
>>we will likely
>>
>>
>>>use it as profligately as we have used fossil
>>>
>>>
>>fuels for the last
>>
>>
>>>century.
>>>
>>>Feel free to forward to ASA if it fits discussion.
>>>
>>>Ruth
>>>
>>>
>>To unsubscribe, send a message to
>>majordomo@calvin.edu with
>>"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
>>message.
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe, send a message to
>>majordomo@calvin.edu with
>>"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
>>message.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Feb 14 00:11:09 2008