I particularly liked the 2nd & 3rd paragraphs from the end. Commonsense may indicate that automatic shut-off systems are needed on many types of electric machinery, but I think the most effective way to increase consumer awareness is to hold (compel) the final consumer culpable for his usage. It is well-known that the best way to get someone's attention is to involve his personal wallet (checkbook, credit card, piggybank). Tanstaafl should be more than jargon, and the system of imposing a hefty charge for excess usage seems to me to be both fair and compassionate.

Now, can someone explain to me why *bigger* is always considered to be better? I admit to being comprehension-impaired when it comes to the actual details of making electricity, regardless of the method of manufacture. Therefore, I truly do not understand why having individuals produce 20% of their electricity (via solar panels, solar hot water, and/or *small* wind turbines,) is not comparable to having those humongeous turbines make enough electricity to equal 20% of a area's usage?

On July 8, 2005, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission approved a 200 mega-watt wind-farm, to be located within five miles of Horicon Marsh. There will be 133 turbines. Horicon is a popular gathering place for migratory water-fowl. I'm not sure why this site was chosen.

Regarding the linked article: "Taking to the Wind," note that one tera-watt = 1 x10(12th power) watt. One kilo-watt = 1 x 10(3rd power) watt.