Could not find a thread on this particular topic, but I want to verify my thoughts. I emailed my local Green Party rep in Canada here regarding his partys take on Nuclear Power. Our particular area of Canada is facing a bit of a situation where more megawatts NEEDS to be available in the next few years, so big decisions are underway. We are also having an election, and I was looking into Green party which is on the rise and thier take on nuclear power. Seems they are set against any new nuclear builds in favour of investing in Wind Power. Wind power would be great when the wind is blowing. A grid system has a 'base load' (the grids minimum consumption of power) Nuke plants provide this because they cant keep lowering and raising power, so they put out a steady amount all the time. 'Peak Power' like in the morning when industrial plants all fire up is provided by hydro and thermal power who can supply more power in a moments notice. So consider adding 10%of the total grid as Wind power. What happens when the wind stops?: Well, the grid is now consuming more power than supplying. So, it needs more instant generation. Where would this come from?? Thermal!!! Burn more oil or natural gas! To me it just doesnt add up. Add more nuclear is the only answer right now. The Base Load is on the rise and this needs to be supplied, and wind can not do it unless backed up by an equivilant amount of thermal generation. Ok, question time. Why do these political people insist on ignoring this? Is it they who are not educated on the subject or is my take on it all wrong??? They stir up public frenzy for no reason. I cant count the amount of times Ive heard people say: "Why are we wasting our money on Nuclear when we could have free wind power??" They only say this because some political group is feeding them a fantasy.