http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/pro-nuclear-gop-senator-urges-tennessee-to-reject-wind-farm/ (http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/pro-nuclear-gop-senator-urges-tennessee-to-reject-wind-farm/)
I tend to be an all of the above kind of guy on future of power with nuclear as an anchor. But I tend to think that the blind plunge into wind and solar to make yourself feel good is not different than the early days of nuclear when it was advertised as clean and too cheap to meter. We are just getting bigger wind turbines that do little to solve the other environmental problems of bird kills, noise, and aesthetics. Slowing down recognizing the need to evolve into a different power grid is not an immediate emergency and could benefit from free market solutions. An example is bladeless turbines.
http://www.wired.com/2015/05/future-wind-turbines-no-blades/ (http://www.wired.com/2015/05/future-wind-turbines-no-blades/)
Projected to power 20,000 homes...........30% of the time. I noticed that wasn't mentioned in the article. This is my kind of Politician.
I'd rather base my electric generation on the atom than mother nature's decision to supply wind.