In fact, there are ZERO fundie anti-nukes on this website who have been able to distinguish the difference between PEAK power and energy.
In fact, I think they
deliberately make this misrepresentation, because otherwise their weak minded crap looks even more ridiculous.
In fact, Bubba, the figures for 2007 are in:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/alternate/page/renew_energy_consump/table1.htmlWind
energy 2006, 0.264 quads, in 2007, 0.319 quads.
Do you know how to subtract 0.319 from 0.264?
No?
Why am I not surprised?
The answer is 0.055.
Now, I know that
you don't give a rat's ass about dangerous natural gas. You couldn't care less how much dangerous fossil fuel gas is indiscriminately into the atmosphere, for instance, and thus spend all of your time criticizing the world's largest, by far, source of climate change gas energy.
But I care about dangerous natural gas. Here are the numbers for production of dangerous natural gas fueled energy. 2006: 22.191 quads. 2007: 23.625.
No idea about how to subtract 22.191 from 236.25?
No surprise there either.
The answer is 1.434. You couldn't care less that the increase in 2007 in dangerous fossil fuels is more than 4 times the
total output of wind energy in 2007.
The 2007 figures are in, and renewable energy has once again, failed to keep up with the
increase in the only dangerous fossil fuel of which it has any utility whatsoever at replacing. I note too, that we are ignoring the spinning reserve requirements that frequently reduce or eliminate the utility of wind power.
Nuclear energy has nothing to do with wind, since nuclear energy is a reliable form of energy, operating with better than 90% capacity utilization, and wind is an unreliable form of energy operating with less than 25% capacity utilization. Nuclear plants do what they are designed to do, which is run flat out, making them the only alternative to coal.
Even so, nuclear energy set a record, despite continued reports of its death from dangerous fossil fuel shills, for production in 2007, producing 8.415 quads in 2007, up by 0.201 quads from 2006.
Like I say, if you don't know what you're talking about, make stuff up.
Fundie math is a pisser.
It doesn't matter, of course, to people who can't do third grade math, but a "quad" is 1.055 exajoules.