These are the points I strongly disagree with: >many of issues you cite are overblown (wildlife impact/noise) Pelicans get covered in oil and die = bad, evil, oil drilling. No pelican should die from oil drilling! Eagles and bats get hit by wind generators = overblown and acceptable loss, some birds will get hit, oh well. This particular issue really gets me riled up.

Noise is an issue for people who live close to the generators. I've heard them going and it's not a pleasant noise.

>There are still unexplored places for wind energy (deep offshore, high altitude) that hold a lot of promise, with technology that already have been developed No they don't, not at least on any sort of acceptable cost basis. It's just pure fantasy to build offshore wind turbines in deep water and think they are going to be economical as compared with any of the other onshore options. Deepwater offshore oil and gas platforms rigs cost a fortune to build and run, but they effectively produce millions of joules of energy during their lifetime. There's simply not enough harvestable energy in the wind to justify anything like that sort of spend for a fraction of the energy produced. It's also fantasy to think you can cover an entire coastline in wind generation and think it's going to come out at anything like a cost effective solution, and particularly when two or three nuclear generators would provide the same coverage with less environmental impact.

Wind energy is an interesting niche product useful for certain areas. It's current status is largely as a result of tax incentives, and it has all the hallmarks of an industry that is overinvested because of available government subsidies. Once those subsidies die (and they will) the market mostly dissappears.

I commend you for coming out in defense of your industry but disagree with pretty much everything.

And as for nuclear fuel only lasting a couple of centuries - for a start I highly doubt the accuracy of that - and further, a couple of centuries is plenty enough time to develop other alternative energy sources. Large scale energy as we know it is barely 100 years old. The big problem 100 years ago was what to do with all the horseshit in the streets, and whether there was enough whale oil around to light reading lamps. The problems facing society 200 years ago are unrecognisable and unthinkable today. It is arrogance in the extreme to think that technology and society in 200 years is going to hinge on decisions made today. It's pointless and a misuse of our time on earth to try and make decisions with that sort of time frame in mind.