Reply #42: Seriously? You are going with anonymous comments as critique?

[kristopher]

That is more crap from people of your caliber. I mean, you don't have to go any further than the first 2 attempts to discredit the paper:

1) "Curiously the Cooper study carries no Copyright."

2) "The Mark Cooper study had no Forward and carried no acknowledgement of financial support."

Answers:
1) Cooper published the paper as an open access document and didn't claim copyright protection because he wants the information distributed.

2) Cooper didn't receive any funding to do the analysis.


Or if you are tired of the nuclear industry's unceasing character assassination, how about the claim further down that there is a direct subsidy for wind of $0.15/kwh when it is about $0.02/kwh.

Why don't you just accept that Cooper and Jacobson have performed good work that contradicts the incestuous output of the nuclear industry and it's organs in the government?