digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at ecoworldly.com

Experts Think China’s Wind Energy Could Grow 1667% by 2020

ecoworldly.com — At present, China produces just over 6 Gigawatts (GW) of wind energy, making it 5th in the world for total wind energy. However, with China ’s massive push for 21st Century renewable technologies, we shouldn’t be surprised if China achieves 100 GW by 2020 say energy experts.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • tenabobina, on 07/05/2008, -2/+41All we really need is 1.21 gigawatts so we can go back in time and fix this horrible mess...
  • mojoe1185, on 07/05/2008, -5/+19Too bad 100 GW is orders of magnitude away from how much power China will be consuming by then.
    • gavinhudson, on 07/06/2008, -0/+4This is a valid concern. However as I mentioned, Steve Sawyer, secretary general of the Global Wind Energy Council, predicts that wind energy could comprise as much as 20% of China's energy needs by 2020.
    • Flytrap, on 07/06/2008, -1/+4At least that will be 100GW that does not pollute the air!

      I'd rather all the leading consumers of energy (North America and Western Europe, included) were making the same kind of effort to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels, rather than letting their envy of China's phenomenal growth to catch up with the rest of the modern world cloud their logic with comments like the one you have just made!
    • Jonez176, on 07/06/2008, -0/+420% is way too significant to be dropping phrases like "orders of magnitude" FYI
    • tyho, on 07/06/2008, -0/+120% is a wet dream, orders of magnitude is a proper term. China's demand will eclipse this small achievement that seems to make so many "feel good". Nuclear is the true solution for lasting clean energy.
  • aki009, on 07/05/2008, -9/+13This is positive news from a renewable energy production perspective.

    However, I would clarify the article by adding that China has a stated capacity for wind energy production, which might be the stated 6 GW (I'm not disputing this number). However, this is likely misleading, as winds are not constant and equipment quality in China tends to be not very high. It would be more useful to state the actual annual production of wind energy in GWh (or MWh), as this would illustrate how much of the capacity is down because of problems (a very common occurrence in China), or producing poorly or not at all due to lack of sufficient airflow (this is hopefully less common if the sites were chosen correctly.)

    As a word of caution let's not forget that this is a _communist_ country that has a track record of caring more about how things look on paper than how well they work in reality. I would not be surprised to find out that have placed capacity where it is not effectively utilized just to satisfy a capacity target on paper.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -4/+5Good comments, and it's beyond me why somebody would digg it down. Digg seems to be experiencing a gradual slide in user IQ and decrease in signal-to-noise. I've begun searching in earnest for alternates to Digg. Any suggestions are most welcome.
    • xkhaozx, on 07/06/2008, -2/+7Wow, talk about over generalization.

      "equipment quality in China tends to be not very high"

      I think you may be confused with American products manufactured in China.

      "how much of the capacity is down because of problems (a very common occurrence in China)"

      Yeah, how about some numbers to prove that "problems" occur more in China than other countries, instead of making such a random remark.

      "(this is hopefully less common if the sites were chosen correctly.)"

      Yes, because China scientists and engineers are obviously less competent than the almighty aki009, who knows exactly where to place wind generators.

      "As a word of caution let's not forget that this is a _communist_ country that has a track record of caring more about how things look on paper than how well they work in reality"

      First of all, China is _not_ a communist country. The closest thing to a communist country would be cuba, and even they aren't an exact communist country.

      And obviously, China is the ONLY government in the world that believes perception is more important than results. I mean, there's no way politicians in the US try to pull off the same crap (thinkofthechildren laws anyone?). And either way, the entire idea that their just BSing this for publicity is completely retarded. China has a very strong motivation to lower their dependency on coal and oil. Their growth rate is massive, and they need to build a sustainable power supply, as well as start lowering the massive pollution they are creating.

      Seriously though, what a random rant.
      • tyho, on 07/06/2008, -2/+3Random rant? You're one to talk. His comments were thoughtful and interesting. You're comments speak volumes for your hatred of America, and really are an example why Digg is less interesting these days.
      • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1I've been to China often enough to know something about the "quality" and the cultural perception towards appearances. It sounds to me like you are simply trying to take off on a tangent, discussing what you want to discuss, and not focusing on the topic, which is Chinese wind energy. When you are ready to converse like an adult (assuming that you are an adult), let us all know.
      • nmessick, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0If China is not communist.. then what is it?

        Any government that does aggressive filtering of the intenet clearly has somthing to hind from its own people.
    • Wrangler76, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Aki: they are doing this out of NECESSITY- not to put things on paper. They cannot continue to consume the huge amount of fossil fuels that they are doing now for another 50 years. They know this. There's only a certain amount of coal in the lungs that their population will take before mass rioting. As I have said elsewhere, this is both good and bad. They get things done much faster and don't have to worry about corporations bitching about loss of profits, but they can also do almost whatever they want to their population.
  • damian7, on 07/06/2008, -2/+9With China on-board, I'm sure we can greatly increase our expansion into alternative energy practices.
    • Nottellin, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1And I thought Chicago was the windy city!
  • tbk123, on 07/06/2008, -7/+41The thing about China is if they decide to do something, they DO it. For instance, a week after that recent earthquake, they were rebuilding permanent housing for victims. In the US we STILL have Katrina victims living in temp housing or displaced!
    • DaDrake, on 07/06/2008, -10/+15And when damning the yaun river, they simply ordered million of families off their property without due process; they also somehow "forgot" to inform many residence (which drowned). Furthermore, the Chinese willingness to be organ donors is unmatch by the western world; apparently, felons line up in droves to be executed and have their organs "donated" for wealthy businessmen.

      It is amazing what you get done with a total disregard for human life. The US still has Katrina victims living in temporary housing because of Americans feeling entitled to government handouts. Money allocated to Katrina victims far surpasses any other disaster and largely, it has gone down a big fat black hole. But by all means, if you are envious of the Chinese people... move there.
      • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -1/+9Calm down, Drake. You're missing the point. Totalitarian regimes, for all their faults, don't have to deal with a lot of the compromises that democracies do, such as when Castro forced college students to teach villagers to read and achieved near 100% literacy in a couple of years.

        Nobody is saying this is how things should be. The fact remains that, if the Chinese gov't pushes a wind power agenda, it could dramatically alter the economics of wind power for the rest of the world, such as by instituting mass-produced turbines at previously impossibly low prices.

        Sometimes good benefits spill over from bad political philosophies. We have to look at the good and bad, not just the bad, otherwise we're just as close-minded as the totalitarian leaders.
      • tyho, on 07/06/2008, -1/+3Thanks DaDrake for saying what was missing. So many here seem to have their rose colored glasses on when judging all countries but the US.
      • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2All those forced to move from their run down villages in china due to the dam construction have had medium density housing constructed for them with electricity and running water on higher ground. For free.

        You speak ***** old chap.
    • unreg, on 07/06/2008, -6/+10Yeah, unfortunately that permanent housing was inferior to the Katrina temporary housing.

      China has thrown off all regards to safety and environmental concerns in its quest for growth.
      • Ortheos, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2No it's not. It's only inferior to you without even having researched it because you're an arrogant prick with a racial superiority complex that believes deep down Chinese can't build descent things, even though they produce 80% of the crap you consume while sitting on your fat arse criticising the crap you consume.
      • unreg, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage ...

        Now that's quality
    • twomeyw23334, on 07/06/2008, -5/+6That's because in the U.S people are allowed to bitch about the government all day long. You don't hear too much negative things about the Chinese handling of the recent earthquake because those who do are arrested.
      http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/21/ ...
      Yeah, why can't America be more like that!?
    • Wrangler76, on 07/06/2008, -2/+1Good point. This is where American and Chinese philosophy separate. I'm not sure why people are debating this. With Americans, many things have to get approved, they have to make sure to satisfy as many people as possible if they matter, etc. With the Chinese, whether for good or bad, they government will do whatever the hell they want quickly and efficiently- if it's approving a toxic waste dump somewhere in China, if it's rebuilding for earthquale victims, approving a one-child policy, modernizing Shanghai etc.
      • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2I find it difficult to believe that someone would use the term "efficiently" to describe the workings of one of the most inefficient bureaucratic machines on this planet. Ignorant of the environment, consequences, or individual rights or suffering: yes. Efficiently: never.
      • Wrangler76, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2What? Do you think if the USA over-populated in the future, the government would quickly act and implement a 1-child policy? While India's population continues to spiral out of control, China's doing something. Why can't India, with a huge population as well, modernize as fast? Do you think the USA would order its population to plant billions of trees in the face of desertification? Economists have even said that China's system may be better for developing countries. Yes, it IS much more efficient when the government doesn't have to account for each of its citizens' needs and jump through red tape hoopla for everything. THAT is a fact. For good or for worse? That is where the debate should start.
    • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -2/+2What the Chinese call permanent housing would likely be torn down in the US for safety reasons.
    • nmessick, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0As someone who had done two stints down in Mississippi doing relief work, I'll stand up and tell you that yes.. there are some people who slipped though the cracks... however many are in the situation they are in because they are too darn lazy to help themselves. I spent weeks building a house for a guy, while he sat in a nearby trailer doing drugs with the little money he made working at pizza hut. He's got a problem and needs help, but he is the cause of his situation... not the government.
  • twodimman, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1Dugg for the photo on the page. too bad it's a bit small to be used as a wallpaper..
  • Kormiku, on 07/06/2008, -3/+8China is already leading the world in getting energy from solar panels. Almost every building is topped with solar panels, and almost all hot water in the country (from tap, and for showers and stuff) is powered by the sun.
    • hitkaiser, on 07/06/2008, -9/+3*****
      • unreg, on 07/06/2008, -2/+3No, really it is. All those shanty towns, the puddles are warmed by the sun.
    • apc3161, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2When was the last time you were in China? I am currently in Shanghai, just came back from Hangzhou, and I have not seen one instance of that whatsoever.
      • ButtSmudge, on 07/06/2008, -0/+5Shanghai dont really get a lot of sun compare to many other Chinese cities throughout the year. CNN did a piece on the solar panel boom in China. One of the city that get the most sun has already installed solar panel on majority of apt builidngs.

        http://youtube.com/watch?v=EqrKeqrkj3o

      • Kormiku, on 07/06/2008, -0/+5Im in northeast china and every building here uses solar power to heat the hot water tanks.
      • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Ditto. I was in both less than a month ago, too. No solar panels. No solar heating. Lots of pollution.
    • cdigioia, on 07/06/2008, -3/+3Complete ***** - China is almost entirely powered by coal. Have you ever visited? The sky is always gray, and good chance you'll get a sore throat from just a few days of exposure.

      Ever read about all the problems athlete's perceive for the Olympic games in Beijing? They're not exaggerating, it's seriously a horrible pollution.

      Or, just go on Google Earth - check out the photos in China - notice how they sky is a strong grey in 95% of the photos? That's not natural, not for those regions.

      I love traveling China, and respect it a lot, but your comment about solar panels is complete & utter *****.

      #1.) It's not true

      #2.) It's about the opposite of the current spirit in China. - China has decided to accept massive environmental damage to achieve higher economic growth. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but that's their priority.

      • Kormiku, on 07/06/2008, -1/+5I could show you guys a picture outside of my window and 95% of buildings have solar panels on the roof. Sure they use coal fuel here also, but it is a fact that they lead the world in solar panel usage. I cant even remember seeing a single solar panel when i lived in america. Edit: its evening now, so I cant take a photo, but if you guys express interest, ill take one tomorrow and upload it so you can see.
      • cdigioia, on 07/06/2008, -0/+4I do have an interest - & what city are you in? I'll try to check some data on how common such things are.
    • nmessick, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0if they don't clean up their air those panels won't work for too much longer.
  • Sarevok9, on 07/06/2008, -4/+1Was I the only person to be very very very disappointed when they realized gigawatt is not the same as jigawatt? I really wanted to see the 50's too =(
  • macmangb, on 07/06/2008, -9/+2China deposed millions of Tibetans to build these wind turbines.
  • hangingchad, on 07/06/2008, -2/+23America has been the biggest contributor to green house gasses for years. Now that developing nations such as India and China are starting to industrialize and increase their green house emissions, all the alarmists can do is point to them as if they are the real reason why global warming is getting worse. Let's just ignore the fact that America has been the leader in pollution for many more years.

    Now wouldn't it be real embarrassing if China became more green then the US in a fraction of the time. With special interest groups and big business affecting policy decisions in Washington DC, I could definitely see something like this playing out.
    • unreg, on 07/06/2008, -6/+4Don't bet on China going green anytime soon. With some of the most egregious environmental practices, their only interest in alternatives is to secure new sources of power.

      I'm surprised they aren't throwing more nuclear reactors up.
    • twomeyw23334, on 07/06/2008, -6/+3China opens a new coal plant every 10 days big enough to serve all the households in Dallas or San Diego.

      From the NY Times, "The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks."
      They already use more coal then us and Japan combined.

      So, as much as I am sure you were hoping, the U.S. doesn't look like it's going to be "embarrassed" by China becoming "more green."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/business/worldbu ...
    • arjie, on 07/06/2008, -0/+10Per capita the US is still the most polluting country, and those numbers aren't biased due to a small population. However, that statement is not intended as a it's-your-fault pointing finger, it's just a reminder that each of you has greater potential to reduce greenhouse gases than each of us in the developing world.
    • tyho, on 07/06/2008, -1/+4It doesn't surprise me much that the anti-American posts get so many diggs anymore, but it does when rational arguments get dugg down.

      It's also interesting to note that the US has reduced it's emissions more than almost all signatories of the Kyoto Protocol.
  • mwaleed86, on 07/06/2008, -10/+3China Rocks

    USA Sucks!
    • warlax27, on 07/06/2008, -4/+2If you got a problem with America, YOU CAN GET OUT! Have fun in communist land!
    • MacParrot, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2Apparently he claims to be from Muscat, not the US. Except Muscat (yes, I've been there) sucks as well.
      • mwaleed86, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Woo Dude!...You are soooo right!...

  • kosmoss, on 07/06/2008, -2/+12China leads in solar panel production as well.
    • unreg, on 07/06/2008, -2/+1Citation?
      • kosmoss, on 07/06/2008, -0/+5Source: TAN solar stocks index (ESLR, STP, YGE, LDK, FSLR, HOKU, CSIQ among many others). Most of these companies are Chinese.
      • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2I can tell you don't follow the stock market. This is not news to the savvy investor. And frankly, you don't need to be a genius to understand why or how, when you look at China's manufacturing capacity. They lead in production of MOST mass-produced things. Ever heard of "Made in China"? There's a reason it's on almost everything Americans buy.
      • kosmoss, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1You are right desertD, I don't follow the stock market, I profit from it. Especially from solars. And after Munich conference.
    • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Yes. For export. Your point?
      • kosmoss, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1They make it affordable, this is the point.
      • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1?? The only connection to this discussion is if China were to use solar power, but right now they are simply a cheap source for other countries that use solar power. If it were cheaper to make them in Zimbabwe, Z would be the next leader in solar panel production. What matters is their _use_, and except for some showcase projects, China has not done much about it. That's not leadership.
  • Splicernyc, on 07/06/2008, -1/+10It goes to show the unbelievable stranglehold that the oil companies and their corporate stockholders have over energy policy in the United States. These folks are doing everything they can to milk the oil fields for every last bit of profit even if it means scuttling renewable energy advances over and over again.

    Efficient cars, wind power, solar power, etcetera - the United States could be a technological leader in all of these if not for a greedy few.
  • zeblith, on 07/06/2008, -5/+6I wish we could harness the power of all the wind and hot air these "experts" are blowing at us. That'd be a cheap and inexhaustible source of energy.
  • Kvasaari, on 07/06/2008, -5/+8Amazing to see that poor communist China is more environmentally aware than rich USA.
    • kosmoss, on 07/06/2008, -1/+5Hmm, poor and rich? Look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ ...
    • iticu, on 07/06/2008, -3/+2China? Environmentally aware?
      Are you stupid?
    • randumbusername, on 07/06/2008, -1/+3environmentally aware? i read somewhere the U.S. is second in wind power usage to germany.

      i don't care as i don't buy into the reneawable energy push. it is just a way for social elite (and people who like to believe they are part of the elite - which you seem to fit.) people with ***** else to do advance to feel good about themselves.

      meanwhile the middle class gets *****.
      • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1randumb: "i don't buy into the renewable energy push"... I'm guessing you're neither an engineer nor a business person? Allow me to drop a free $100 bill into your lap: There has never been a more perfect storm of a global trend than we are witnessing today, and ANYBODY with a little bit of smarts can have a seat at the table, just by placing bets the same places the auto and energy companies are hedging (they're buying alt energy, lithium ion battery companies, etc.). I've already made $35K in green tech and oil stocks, and it will frankly be easy to do so as long as there are still naysayers. When comments like yours come to a stop however, it will be time to get out of the market, because all of the bears will have climbed on the bandwagon and there will be no more entrants. Thank god for information asymmetry, laggards, and oddly rare foresight to accept one simple truism: things change.
    • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2Buried for receiving the Most Ignorant Stupid Statement of the day award.
  • danielbrandt, on 07/06/2008, -6/+0If you shop on eBay, it's 100% guaranteed if you buy from someone in China, you are buying a counterfit good. That's why ebay got sued. This didn't happen until eBay opened trade up with China ebayers.
  • karebu, on 07/06/2008, -3/+1Oh surely you meant 1667.198787615670484899856078908647%?
  • gkiltz, on 07/06/2008, -3/+1It COULD happen, or not!
    Of all the things that could happen, how many DO?
    Really?
    One thing we can say is that, with China's one-child policy, and much of the country earthquake-prone, by 2020, China's population will be smaller, and older, and won't need as much energy!
    • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2China's population will be higher in 2020. ***** you're dumb. Short-term population forecasts are among the most reliable in demographics. Did you really think that demographers don't consider primary sex ratio in their models? *****, people on Digg are getting so ***** DUMB, it's mind-numbing.

      I miss the old Digg! Note to dumb people, please just read and don't post here unless you have relevant knowledge.
  • emanuelamonica, on 07/06/2008, -2/+1Good for them, but I'm not sure if it's good for us too. We don't know for what will they use that energy.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -1/+4All that power is for manufacturing your iPod, dumbass. Where do you think all the ***** Americans buy comes from?

      Another stupid ass xenophobe.

      If you can control your fears, try traveling abroad sometime, and not on a tour bus. You might actually learn something.
  • bigsteve3OOO, on 07/06/2008, -1/+0also in experts think that a 3 peckered owl would be hornier.
  • merlin5, on 07/06/2008, -5/+4Wake up Diggers! China is one of the worst environmental offenders in the world. What a joke. They have no EPA standards and produce staggering amounts of pollution. Because of China, India, and Russia, Anything we do would have zero impact on mitigating what some perceive as an impending Global warming crisis.
    • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -0/+6First rule of forecasting: Never assume a steady state -- expect 2nd and 3rd-order effects. Every society has a needs hierarchy. China is transitioning from a poor country worried about starvation to the world's largest middle class. Once the average family has a car, the next thing they'll demand is clean air. This is an unfolding process. I would not be at all surprised if they led the world in clean tech in 20 years, because they'll have the biggest mess to clean up.

      This brilliant demonstration makes the future very clear: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/hans_rosling_sh ...
  • aserer511, on 07/06/2008, -6/+2Yeah, but the hippy who submitted this to guilt trip Americans STILL forgot china's dependence on goal and lower corporate missions mean they're still much worse for the environment than we are
    • desertDenizen, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Dugg down this Brown for misuse of "hippy." Get your insults straight. (Hippies are counter-culturalists; environmentalism went mainstream a long time ago.)
  • Erythroxylum, on 07/06/2008, -6/+5Do they use these wind turbines to provide the energy needed to build the coal-fired power stations which they build a new one of every ten days?

    China is lucky. Since it's a quasi-Communist country it doesn't give much of a ***** about human rights. Consequently, they don't have to worry about the weight-around-the-neck effect of EnvironMentalists like we do in the West. When an EnvironMentalist starts whinging about some grievance they've spent a while dreaming up, instead of saying, 'Oh, how terrible - we simply must do something about that!' like we do, they say, 'You're counter-revolutionary!' and then take them and throw them in jail or put a bullet in their head.
  • KhanneaNL, on 07/06/2008, -2/+8Wow, china is leaving the rest of the world eating dust. This is certainly the age of China.
  • barryblogger, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Sounds to me like it's time to buy stock in some Chinese wind companies! See below:
    http://seekingalpha.com/article/64941-blowing-hot- ...
  • PhonicUK, on 07/06/2008, -0/+11Couldn't they say 1337% just for ***** and giggles?
  • mrzack, on 07/06/2008, -0/+8Time to buy Chinese energy stocks. Get your money out of US stocks now. It's gonna tank. get your money out of US dollars now, it's gonna tank. Get yourself outta US now, it's gonna tank.
    • Kormiku, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1amen
    • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1US stocks are overvalued no doubt, but if you are thinking Chinese stocks are a good investment then I believe you have a few (expensive) lessons to learn. You'd probably be better off going to Vegas with your money.
  • JointVenture, on 07/06/2008, -4/+3COULD is not news.

    Jesus COULD come back tomorrow, or maybe he doesnt exist.

    Look at any news site and 50% of it isnt news, its "may" , or "could".
  • spiritflare1, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1and a 1667% increase in other people's farts being circulated in the air. And 1.3B pop. is a lot of farts.
  • BillE3, on 07/06/2008, -0/+3With no enviro groups to stop the windwills because of bird strikes, I can imagine that China will build a lot of them. The wind mills near the Bay Area never turn because the birds of prey found them to be good nesting and roosting places with good hunting below.
    • aki009, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Considering the Chinese attitude towards the environment, I'd say the restaurants near wind farms will offer really inexpensive bird dishes. (Assuming that any birds have survived the air quality.)
  • projectstartrek, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Why couldn't they have replaced those 6s with 3s to make it more Digg appropriate?
  • DeadBabySoup, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2at least china is starting to do something about its energy use rather than americans bitching about ruining their ocean views....god forbid
  • trollick, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2I think my wind energy use could increase by 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% by 2020. (I pretty much use none now)
  • h0ser, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1that's a huge increase for anything, the fact that its for wind power makes it so much better.
  • Barackalypse, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Ok, here's a tip, when discussing alternative energy (sources that have highly variable instantaneous outputs) you should be quoting how much energy it produces per year or some other suitable amount of time, not how much instantaneous power it is capable of producing under whatever rated conditions. A 200 watt solar panel doesn't tell me how much energy I can expect it to produce unless you tell me where it is, that panel produces perhaps 0.7 kilowatt hours per day by me, but in California it would produce closer to 1.2 kilowatt hours per day. So of China's 6 GW, how many kilowatt hours per year is it actually producing?
  • beauley, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1With Global Warming on many people's minds, do we have any ideas of the best way to lessen the impact on our future, or maybe a possible relief of its possible ravages or even a possible key to its eventual reversal. Many scientific experts have proposed
    http://www.quazen.com/Science/Technology/Solar-Pow ...
    Solar Power, Source of Endless Energy
  • nmessick, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0I'm about tired of all these green crap.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.