alt.energy.renewable

On 3 sep, 21:18, Anthony Matonak
wrote:
> daestrom wrote:
> > "Arnold Walker" wrote in message
> >> Therefore by logic progression solar and wind is not renewable ,since
> >> they come from a non renewable source.
>
> > But under the common definition of 'renewable resource', wind and solar
> > do fit the category.
>
> As Daestrom said, renewable energy is not defined by logic. The

This is the whole point, if the definition or choice of an "renewable
energy" source was defined by logic rather than all those new
fantastic ideas then we wouldn't waste money. Currently we do waste
money, in particular tax money.

Just name me one viable "renewable" energy source that will provide an
alternative to burning fossil fuels. Nuclear energy is the only source
that is currently capable of providing anything on the level of ie.
50% of our current energy budget. But it is not considered to be a
renewable energy source by many.

So what new fantastic idea comes up next? Reduction of fossil fuel
usage is a viable option, but again, not a renewable alternative.

It is really a very difficult problem, we are stuck.


> time frame is usually limited to a few years or, at most, a human
> lifespan. This makes solar, wind, biomass renewable while coal
> and oil are not.
>
> /Articles/ ?topicnum=11
> : Renewable energy resource: an energy resource that is replaced rapidly
> : by natural processes.
>
> /basics/
> : Renewable energy resources are naturally replenished in a relatively
> : short period of time.
>
> Anthony