Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Genius Micro Hydro Turbine Halves Cost of Energy" video.

  1. No the problem is you shouldn't be comparing it to solar at all. This is the thing I find so frustrating in almost every energy story being presented everywhere. IF someone has a conveniently located stream then this might be the best solution. BUT if they are in Morocco or Outback Australia this thing will be useless and solar with be better. BUT then you might go to one of the islands off Scotland and irrespective of how much sun they might get at times or how much rain they get, you just know a small wind turbine is going to be the best solution. BUT then you go down to dreary old London where the most abundant natural resource is fog and several million people wanting to boil the kettle after Coronation street, then a thumping big nuclear plant is pretty sensible. AND that's the REAL STORY on FUTURE ENERGY. It will depend on where you need that energy, how much energy you need at that location and what's most practical for that environment.
    8
  2.  @The1Elcil  NO its not about being PROFITABLE. For fark sake can everyone get over this nonsense that everything has to be done for profit. That's that Milton Freidman nonsense that needs to be stomped out of existence.. We need to start thinking in terms of ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. You can't ignore costs. That's just as stupid as insisting on everything being profitable. There used to be this expression "value for money" as in "We bought this for $X and we got good value for the money we spent." If you're a town, city or even just a house then you have to ask: What gets you the most reliable energy for the money you/we can afford to spend on energy? If you start every conversation with: What's going to get the shareholders the most profit?. Then you you are farked before you even start.
    2