Re: Fluorescent Bulbs Are Known to Zap Domestic Tranquillity; Energy-Savers a Turnoff for Wives

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> However, as long as coal is plentiful (and cheap) it _will_ be used and
> anyone who thinks otherwise is hopelessly naive.

So true.  It seems that knowing that the US, China and plenty of other
countries will be burning coal until the sky is black, we had best do what
we can to "clean the tailpipes."  That's where the government *should* be
coming in (and may, in time) giving incentives to the private sector to do
massive, A-bomb level R&D on the problem.  The trouble is that there are few
incentives left since plant owners have extracted big tax breaks for years
to the point where I doubt anything short of a transfer straight from the US
Treasury would motivate them.

We've split the atom, reached the outermost planets, cloned complex
creatures and much, much more.  It's just not conceivable we can't solve a
problem like removing the worst of the pollutants from smokestacks of the
world's power plants.  I remember a time when you couldn't stand behind a
car without getting knocked out by the fumes.  Now you can stand behind most
cars and smell nothing and see nothing but a little water vapor at startup.

The recent "war on terrorism" has set back nuclear power considerably, and
although new plants are coming on line, they're in old locations where
permit battles have already been fought and won.   Nuke power doesn't solve
the waste problem, either, it just transmogrifies it into another kind of
problem.

The world will eventually turn to the sun for that reasons and I hope that
when the solar train gets moving that the advances come as rapidly as they
did with PC's.  I also hope that the sky isn't too dim and murky by then to
generate any electricity.  Imagine the effect of the X trillion dollars the
Iraqi escapade will cost put into solar rebates.  Lots of coal plants would
become museum pieces.

--
Bobby G.