Windmills versus nuclear energy

americanthinker.com ^ | 6/4/2019 | Jon N. Hall

[TheRightGuy]

Not good at picking up sarcasm, are ya???

i thought sarcasm was considered racist when dealing with reparations ... my bad ;^)

[rjsimmon]

Oooh, you might be right. Mea Culpa.

[itsahoot]

I have been re-educated.

Actually a section is 640 acres unless it lies on a section correction line, in which case it will actually be smaller.{:-)

[Sacajaweau]

Yup

[faucetman]

Wind power = Biggest ecological footprint.

Nuclear power = Smallest ecological footprint, even though nuclear plants are required to own a much larger piece of land than they need or want.

Wind and solar still need an equivalent amount of traditional power as backup for when the sun don’t shine and the wind don’t blow.

We should replace all electricity generation, other than water power, with nuclear. Start NOW!

Not one penny more for solar and wind. (A total WASTE of money)

[ravenwolf]

A mistake any one can make.

[Paal Gulli]

Windmills enough to power all of the US would take a land mass slightly larger than the state of Nevada. I’m just using Nevada for a size reference, not implying it has wind enough to make wind farming there financially viable. Wherever it was, that land mass would be rendered uninhabitable by the low frequency vibrations a windmill induces into the ground.

Enough nuclear power plants to power the whole of the US could fit inside of Dallas County.