Originally Posted by Yearofthe1
Transmission, oh yeah, that would take an actual investment in our grid's infrastructure. God-forbid. It's not like we don't know how to build power lines. Plus, you need to look into this: http://rael.berkeley.edu/node/248
The technology is there, it just needs funding.
Storage: let's see: The hydrogen battery - http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80...-solar-energy/
and the vanadium battery: http://discovermagazine.com/2008/oct...ergy%20storage
But again, guess what, no funding. But yeah, let's spend BILLIONS on fossil fuels!
Hydrogen/Electric has all the potential to provide the world with transportation energy.
Do you really think someone has counted how many birds are killed by turbines? I mean, look at the statsistic you provided. That's a rediculous range, it's meaningless.
At least with those heavy metals we have a better chance at sequestering and recycling them. The sequestering of CO2 has proven to be cost/energy prohibitive.
Well, if you want to talk pure economics, then yeah, let's keep on the fossil fuel path, because that's what's making the most money right now. Do you really think one of the most powerful industries in the world is going to make any meaningful investment into technologies that'll essentially be free once the infrastructure is built. Show me the money, Fuck The Earth!
The point is that every method of developing energy is going to have downsides. Period.