Nuclear power is a short term solution. Expended control rods are the biggest problem and the nations' reactors are overflowing with them.

I'd prefer to see new ideas put forth. My idea for storm dissipation towers to catch lightning in areas which experience a lot of it, is just one dual-purpose idea. A moderate thunderstorm generates several hundred megawatts of electrical power.1

The average nuclear reactor may have a daily capacity of between 600 and 1100 megawatts. So a good thunderstorm generates almost as much electricity as a nuclear reactor does in a day.

Capturing this energy and storing it could provide many regions with another source of electrical energy. It could never do the job of providing all the necessary power for all but those areas where electrical use is elemental, but as an additional self-renewing clean energy source of electrical power for major cities it can't be beat.

Anyone whose seen a fare share of electrical storms knows that some regions would really generate much more than the average and that the towers and power grid would pay for themselves in short order.

Wind power and solar power are still elemental but everything helps. I know some folks out here who have a $30-40 dollar monthly electric bill because they have solar power panels set up. Versus the average $200 bill generated by AC running 24/7 almost six months of the year, this is quite a savings.

If everyone in sunny regions had solar, it would certainly reduce the load on other power generation sources.

I have faith in the capitalist system to produce these types of things and for competition to keep improving them and building upon the renaissance of new technology which will mark the 21st century.

Remember what Reagan said when he was spokesperson for GE:

"Progress is our most important product!"

;-)

1 Williams,E R, The Electrification of Thunderstorms, Scientific American Nov 88, p88.