2007-12-10 11:27:31 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
It doesn't matter what you build to generate electricity, it is going to be an eyesore. Nuclear Power Stations are hardly centrefold material!
How much is "enough water"? We have nowhere near enough hydropower to meet the nations needs. On top pf that, demand for electricity is rising all the time, but our water stocks are slowly falling. So wind is going to be an invaluable source in the future.
Remember also, compared to the nuclear industry, renewable energy sources have been massively underfunded by the government. When they have benefitted from the kind of investment the nuclear industry has, we will be able to produce much less conspicuous, more efficient and quieter wind turbines.
2007-12-10 16:55:08 · answer #1 · answered by Stealthbong 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think wind turbines are a very good invention and have no big effect on the climate accept not looking atractive , if water turbines are used there will be a problem caused to all tides and flows this will have a knock on effect across the world causing floods in some areas and water shortage in others
2007-12-10 11:49:33 · answer #2 · answered by MICHAEL A 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Believe it or not. The United States has the most constant wind velosity in the world & it covers most of the USA. I travel through western Pennsylvania very often. I have never went through Somerset that the giant wind turbines are not turning! With this steady wind supply it makes sense to utilize it. I'm all for it!
2007-12-10 11:41:27 · answer #3 · answered by peepers98 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There Are Underwater Current Turbines, What's Your Question?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Current_Turbines
http://www.mms.gov/PhotoGalleryPages/CurrentUnderwaterTurbine.htm
Photos:
http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0geu6qO211Hmf0AAy9XNyoA?ei=UTF-8&p=current%20turbines&fr2=tab-web&fr=b1ie7
Not Sure, But Both Will Need Replaced Before They Even Pay For Themselves, At 8.5 Cents Per KWh.
2007-12-10 11:35:30 · answer #4 · answered by cnn_psyops 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't find wind turbines an eyesore. They are far more attractive than electricity pylons that stretch the length and breadth of the UK and if they help save the environment whilst providing power then that's ok by me. I think they should be part of a varied plan for renewable energy, wind, water and solar.
2007-12-10 11:32:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Because building water turbines kills the fishes.
2007-12-10 11:30:17 · answer #6 · answered by netjr 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
the country might have more wind
you need a large dam to use water turbines
2007-12-10 11:31:03 · answer #7 · answered by Brendon!!! 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wind turbines produce more power, and I think they are quite pretty to look at anyway! Better than powerstations.
2007-12-10 11:40:27 · answer #8 · answered by SAMANTHA H 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Windmill placement may be subjected to ice flows, ocean currents, nor'easters and the undesirable yachters? i think of of the questional stability of off shore oil drilling structures in the Gulf of Mexico anytime a typhoon strikes. Any shape of something to maintain money will finally end up costing us in the long-term whilst that is placed on water. yet i'm particular El Kennedy Grande is greater against them as a results of fact they might wreck his view as a results of fact he would be confident he owns Nantucket Sound.
2016-12-31 05:51:51 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Try and get those built. If you can get by the tree huggers complaining about the effects of water turbines on fish.
2007-12-10 11:31:19 · answer #10 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋