Flopper
Diamond Member
- Mar 23, 2010
- 31,623
- 8,756
If we are going to have fossil fuel powered generating plants, natural gas is the best alternative. CO2 emissions are half that of coal fired generation and a third less than oil fired generation. Major pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are a small fraction of that produced by coal or oil.We can build much safer nuke plants than we did in the 60s and 70s.
And if it weren't for liberal whiners, we would. With zero CO2.
You'd think the warmers would climb on the nuke bandwagon.
Thorium reactors could save the ice that they love so much.
Let's try for a new oil refinery first....haven't had one approved in almost 40 years. Which is why the Keystone XL is needed now.
I must admit a preference for natural gas powered electric generation.
I see the movement away from fossil fuels as a very long process taking at least a hundred years. It will probably take at least another 20 years are so to come up with an agreed upon viable plan and a method of financing it. The real answer for power generation needs to be a new technology such as fusion and who knows how long that's going to take. Even if we had practical fusion generation available today, it would probably take 50 years to replace all fossil fuel generation.