[biblewonk]

-- from what you said earlier-- Let's see we have an energy source that costs almost as much to build as a nuclear power plant, costs almost as much to maintain as a nuclear power plant, takes up much more space than a nuclear power plant (like 10 to 100 times the space), and produces an insignificant portion of the electricity (like 1/100 to 1/1000 the electricity). Sounds like a silly energy source to me.

I guess you don't understand what you are posting then. This implies a very very expensive form of energy. It would have to be about a thousand times as exensive as a nuke, but as I said, you don't understand what you are saying. No wonder you get offended when I actually understand it and sum up.

[discostu]

And by the data you presented that is correct, the dollar costs for wind and nuclear are about the same: they're both cheap over the long haul with a big initial investment. Problem is in the space of one good windfarm you could put multiple nuclear power plants and get more energy.