

Seven Myths About Alternative Energy  - cwan
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/12/seven_myths_about_alternative_energy

======
mixmax
Single page version:
[http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/12/seven_myths...](http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/12/seven_myths_about_alternative_energy?page=full)

------
cousin_it
Blah blah blah. I can't _stand_ those "big picture" articles that don't back
up their claims with numbers. If you're like me, you'll find this online book
on sustainable energy a much more enjoyable read:
<http://www.withouthotair.com/> \- it's all numbers from start to finish.

~~~
electromagnetic
I second the blah's, FP has god awful and misleading articles.

The best example I could find is here:
[http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/20/scenes_from...](http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/20/scenes_from_violent_twilight_of_oil_photo_essay?page=0,4)
where the writing seems to be blaming oil extraction for the duckweed algae.
However oil _kills_ duckweed algae, the reason the algae is so present in the
salt lake is because of sewage been dumped into it. I remember my parent's
garden pond had a major outbreak of it because birds kept crapping in it, and
one of the actual treatments we were referenced to for it was actually a
petroleum based oil.

------
roc
As the price of fuel and electricity continues to rise, the costs and delays
surrounding new nuke plants will go away.

Also: the bone-headed restriction against modern reactors and reprocessing
will go away.

------
djcjr
How is this site NOT propaganda? Am I not reading this carefully enough?

~~~
gaius
Propaganda for or against whom? It seems quite balanced to me.

------
thras
He claims that nuclear power can't do anything because we can't build plants
fast enough and that plant-construction costs have been rising.

The first is a red-herring. It depends a lot on climate projections and so
forth. And since it's faster to expand nuclear power than any other emissions-
free power, it's not actually an argument not to do it.

The second is more problematic. Cost. Maybe we've lost the ability to build
cheap nuclear plants like we could in the 1960s. Maybe modern regulatory and
labor problems are unsolvable. But I don't think so. They're a heck of a lot
easier to solve than basic technology problems, which is what we're still
running into with other forms of energy.

~~~
masomenos
Nuclear plants were cheap in the 60s?

~~~
simonsarris
They were a lot less nuanced in the 60s, for sure.

With all modern proper safety procedures taken, I imagine they are more
expensive now.

(They also produce a mere fraction of the waste, now)

~~~
tome
It's not just safety procedures either. The whole reactor designs are safer
now too.

