From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Fri Jun 01 2001 - 07:34:23 MDT
In a message dated 6/1/2001 8:55:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ckuecker@mcs.net writes:
<< We have the technology to produce SAFE reactors, if only someone will
allow
them to be developed. Again, I must bring up the IFR at Argonne Labs, that
Clinton's administration killed off so efficiently. >>
The Integral Fast Reactor is nice, as well as the Pebble Bed Reactor. Having
said that we may be missing the forest for the trees. What we need is
abundent, reliable power-not necessarilly nuclear. So what's the
alternatives? What is economically, achievable and viable?
Perhaps multiple site small scale power sources.
1.Depending of the availability of natural gas (methane)
2. Coal gasification and/or liquefaction
3. Photovoltaics and wind, combined with fuel cell, flywheel, or zinc/air
batteries.
4. Recent tech advances to make ethanol (hic!) production from cellulose much
more
efficient.
These methods have drawbacks and there are always challenging assertions by
rivals. There always will be. Nuclear is neither the demon nor the angel of
energy production. I am more concerned, though, in third-world countries
opting for nukes (assuming affordability) and screwing up the planet, because
they decide to shortchange the safety systems.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:52 MST