[discostu]

That's still a junky uptime, the competing systems have uptimes that goes months or years without a break. In Altamont we're looking at the equivalent of Chrysler K cars, it's only 20 years not 80.

You're responses come off as canned because each one is built around an ASSumption of why I think windpower isn't there yet, and each one of your ASSumptions have been wrong. You assumed it was because I was anti-green, not the case. You assumed it was because I hadn't bothered to do any research, not the case. Here you're assuming I'm following Rush' lead, again not the case (I hate talk radio and don't give a damn what Rush says about anything anywhere at anytime). Windpower simply isn't there yet, the technology isn't efficient enough or reliable enough. Someday soon it may be but it's not now. The only part of it I'm against is implementing it when it is not yet a viable power source, it should only be implimented in experimental blocks until it's ready. When it's ready it'll be great, until then we're sinking a lot of time money and land into it when we could get a better return on other power sources.

[newgeezer]

In Altamont we're looking at the equivalent of Chrysler K cars, it's only 20 years not 80.

Your (as you put it so well) "ASSumption" is that wind power generation technology has advanced no more than that for automobiles over the past 20 years. That is wrong. But, it might explain why you continue to focus on Altamont Pass.

Windpower simply isn't there yet, the technology isn't efficient enough or reliable enough.

If 3-to-5 cents per kWhr isn't good enough for you, what will it take? Oh, I know. You're hooked on that "land use" thing. Well, maybe it won't work for the coastal folks. But, here in flyover country, we normally have such a glut of corn and soybeans that the farmers welcome the chance to produce something more profitable on the land.

Maybe it's a matter of perspective.