[KingM]

As we move toward electrifying our power generation and away from petroleum and other liquid fuels, the two most promising power sources are wind and nuclear. Nuclear has well known drawbacks, with issues about security, storage of materials, and nuclear proliferation. Wind suffers none of these side effects.

Indeed, wind has many advantages. It is distributed and not vulnerable to terrorist attack. It does not produce greenhouse gases. It is renewable. It provides local, high-tech jobs and gives additional income to farmers, ranchers, and other landowners in rural areas who earn royalties from allowing wind farms on their properties. As costs have fallen and efficiencies have risen, wind power is now competitive purely based on cost, let alone environmental considerations.

Read the rest here.

[Caoimhan]

It's a nice idea, and we certainly should be getting involved in wind in a big way, but it won't be done without some other "baseload" power source. Nuclear is actually very good as a baseload. Better than coal, in my opinion. And nuclear and coal are really the only two viable options to scale up electricity in a massive way.

Wind will play a significant role, but not likely over 20% of total electrical generation.

[KingM]

I am absolutely in favor of nuclear power, and you raise some good points. We should not use more coal, both because of its environmental record and because of its use as a fuel of last resort for petroleum replacement.