I originally posted to this list expecting more technical responses than political ones. Aesthetically I don't like solar farms but as one who literally grew up in a junk yard I can't really complain about that. Everybody recognizes the need for junk yards they just want them in somebody else's neighborhood. I am a strong believer that a person should be able to do whatever he wants with his own property. Is the technology mature and cheap enough that we can use and maintain it in an economical and environmentally friendly way even after the government subsidies run out? For example many say they are environmentally friendly because they don't generate the smoke that fossil fuel plants do. However, they rarely mention the other toxic effects mentioned. How do they balance out? Do they? Should they, I will leave to the politicians and philosophers. (I really didn't expect much of that on this list.) Although it is used as such, I don't see the expression "environmentally friendly" as political. It is a matter of technology and the use of that technology. You are right about the term "PC." I should have defined it as it apparently has different meanings to different people. I am a big supporter of health and environment. I use the term "PC" to mean action purported to have environmental or safety gains but really aimed at gaining political mileage or acceptance without a realistic evaluation of the initial action. I apologize for the unintended consequences. Thanks, Allen -----Original Message----- From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of Bob Blick Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 11:43 AM To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Subject: Re: [OT] Solar Power There are lots of people with money. If they want to invest in solar farms instead of reactors, it's their money and their property. At least they aren't burning tires or raising pigs. Would you rather live next to a new solar farm or a 50 year old reactor? Rust never sleeps. The commercial and military nuclear industry made some big messes, and the Department of Energy spends $8 billion every year cleaning up old sites like Hanford. Terms like "PC" get thrown around as if those on the other side are foolish, ignoring the haste and greed that caused the problem in the first place. Certainly nuclear power could be done safely. But would I trust you to do it? Would you trust me? Would any of us trust Windows 10? Your original post had some prickly edges, and I'm trying to sort out what the intent was, whether you were curious about the economics of solar power in your area, had environmental concerns, merely feeling NIMBY, or just wanted to vent frustrations about the political climate. If we all put a little extra effort into making our posts to the Piclist clear and factual, with some forethought about the responses they might provoke, we might be able to keep threads from snowballing into disastrous situations. Thanks, Bob ________________________________________ From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu on behalf of Allen Mulvey Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 5:08 AM To: 'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.' Subject: RE: [OT] Solar Power That, I think, is much of the problem. We have cheap energy available but it is not PC and everyone is afraid to use it. Allen - --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .