Ausubel of Rockefeller University says the key renewable energy sources, including sun, wind and biofuels, would all require vast 1 of land if developed up to large scale production unlike nuclear power. That land would be far better left alone, he says. Renewables look attractive when they are quite 2 . But 3 we start producing renewable energy on a large scale, the fallout (结果) is going to be horrible. Instead, Ausubel argues 4 renewed development of nuclear.
Ausubel 5 his conclusions by yzing the amount of energy renewables, natural gas and nuclear that can produce in terms of power per square meter of land used. Moreover, he claims that as renewable energy use increases, this measure of efficiency will 6 as the best land for wind, biofuels, and solar power gets used up.
Using biofuels to obtain the 7 amount of energy as a 1000 megawatt (兆瓦) nuclear power plant would require 2500 square kilometers of farm 8 , Ausubel says. "We should be sparing land for nature, not using it as pasture (牧场，草地) for cars and trucks," he adds.
Solar power is 9 more efficient than biofuel in terms of the area of land 10 , but it would still require 150 square kilometers of photovoltaic (光电的) cells to 11 the energy production of the 1000 MW nuclear plant. In another example, he says meeting the 2005 US electricity demand 12 wind power alone would need 780, 000 square kilometers, an area the size of Texas.
However, several experts are highly critical 13 Ausubel"s conclusions. John Turner of the US government"s National Renewable Energy Laboratory says that 14 the US got all of its power from solar energy, it would still need less than half the amount of land that has been paved over for highways. Further, it need not 15 additional land. The US could get a quarter of its energy just from covering rooftops of 16 buildings, he says.
According to Turner, the same "dual use" also 17 to wind power. The footprint for wind is only 5% of the land that it 18 . Farmers can still farm the land that the turbines (涡轮机) are on. Turner says looking solely at land use is an oversimplification of the 19 "I"m not sure I"d want to build one of these nuclear plants in Afghanistan, but we could 19 put in wind and solar power," he adds.