tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6675066536722336536.post6855064365596005897..comments2008-12-03T18:53:44.563-08:00jdsutterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04028115877435251407noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6675066536722336536.post-56528538688057746432008-12-03T18:53:00.000-08:002008-12-03T18:53:00.000-08:00You're welcome.<BR/>Yeah, wind is the big talk here for sure. I thought it was interesting how the wind conference focused a lot on the drawbacks: unanswered questions from landowners, wildlife issues ... none of the alternatives seem to be a silver bullet.jdsutterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04028115877435251407noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6675066536722336536.post-34986896064931080232008-12-03T09:56:00.000-08:002008-12-03T09:56:00.000-08:00Thanks for the coverage. I was disappointed Fleischaker didn&#39;t mention concentrating solar thermal for possible utility scale deployment. California utilties currently have three such projects underway and other states aren&#39;t far behind, yet Oklahoma with it&#39;s abundant sunshine has zero on the horizon. Why is it Oklahoma lags in the kind of innovation that maximizes non-polluting, renewable energy with the greatest energy net input payoff? With the exception of wind (which OG&amp;E reluctantly embraced), we seem determined to plow ahead with liquid or dirtiers fuel (such as coal) that doesn&#39;t maximize the energy required to produce them. I know this is oversimplying a bit, but hopefully you catch my drift.ThinkLadyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17046797688448950355noreply@blogger.com