Paul Driessen, senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow: “Offshore wind currently provides just 0.3% of global power generation,” IEA executive director Fatih Birol noted. But “wind farms” constructed closer than 37 miles from coastlines around the world, where waters are less than 60 meters (197 feet) deep, could generate 36,000 terawatt-hours (36 million gigawatt-hours or 36 billion megawatt-hours) of electricity a year. More turbines will mean countless seagoing birds will get slaughtered and left to sink uncounted and unaccountable beneath the waves. The eventual jungle of fixed and floating turbines will severely interfere with surface and submarine ship traffic."Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming, based on a mere BELIEF, like any other religion, is as laughable (if it weren't for their wilful and unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight, or the force of gravity, or the composition of Jupiter.
Don Bogard, radio-geochemistry, nuclear geochemistry, planetary science: This article is another scientist's opinion on use of fossil fuels and what will be required for a transition when fossil fuels eventually run out or if governments decide to force abandonment of these energy resources that have created the modern world. He makes a very important conclusion: "Any significant change to the US power infrastructure MUST be a measured and long-term endeavor." There are several reasons for the long transition time: a) We don't have the technical ability to build nuclear plants that fast. b) We must establish used nuclear fuel reprocessing, mainly to save the unused 99% of nuclear energy from the ore. Don't put it back in the ground "forever." c) We must establish standard ways of storing the remaining radioactive waste. d) Nuclear power should only be used in countries with stable governments, strong economies, good education systems, well developed industries to perform some of the maintenance operations. e) We must develop additional nuclear power technologies besides the very large Light Water Reactors of the past. Don Bogard understands these needs. Too many outside the nuclear power profession wrongfully claim that the whole world can be owning and operating nuclear plants in fifty or one hundred years. In reality, it will be several centuries, maybe longer. We must have wise energy planning for the whole world NOW. That must include fossil fuels for generating electricity, not abandoning them for wind and solar.
(Eric Jelinski, James Conca, John Shanahan) Canada, USofA - What energy mix will North America have in 2100?27.Oct.2019
Eric Jelinski, past president of Environmentalists for Nuclear - Canada, farmer, environmentalist, university lecturer with degrees in mechanical and chemical nuclear engineering: There is no such thing as renewable energy. Could you build a renewable energy system without any support from coal, oil or natural gas? I’d like to see the renewable energy advocates mine, manufacture and transport everything that is needed for wind and solar farms and electrical distribution networks using wind and solar alone. Jim Conca, geologist, science and energy writer for Forbes predicts the 2100 mix will be natural gas and wind. John Shanahan, civil engineer says that natural gas and nuclear is better.
Viv Forbes, Executive Director of the Saltbush Club which opposes the war on carbon energy, opposes real pollution, and promotes the rational and sustainable use of carbon energy and carbon food: Rarely has the dire future of the free world been so succinctly and precisely described. The world must not allow Green Extremists to impose wind and solar energy on those who want reliable energy from well managed fossil fuels and hydro-electric power.