Yeah, exactly what is

Jamie Friedland — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:34:05 +0000

In reply to The Atlantic had an article

Yeah, exactly what is "renewable" or "clean" poses more problems. Including nuclear etc as a compromise to get a "satisfactorily strict" standard effectively negates the strictness that made it satisfactory. Expanding the definition is as bad as setting the sights too low.

The Atlantic had an article

Donal — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:08:25 +0000

In reply to Baby Steps: The Senate Eyes a Renewable Electricity Standard

The Atlantic had an article on RES/RPS:

Debate rages over which energy sources to include in the standard. Supporters of a straight RES want to stick to the traditional renewables of solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and, in some cases, hydropower. Supporters of a "clean" rather than "renewable" energy standard want to include nuclear power, carbon capture-equipped coal plants, and natural gas. In order to obtain a satisfactorily strict standard, Democrats may have to compromise on this point.

I read that Ohio already counts "advanced nuclear power generation," which probably isn't fusion, as eligible for RES credits. Admittedly it is hard to increase the percentage without burning something. It can take two or three thousand wind turbines to replace one Pennsylvania coal-fired plant. But I can't get behind nuclear fission when we can't even keep our bridges from falling down.

dagblog - Comments for "Baby Steps: The Senate Eyes a Renewable Electricity Standard"

Yeah, exactly what is

The Atlantic had an article