Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Applying your standard against renewables, we determine renewables are a power source very very very very very very very (each an order of magnitude) inferior to nuclear.
Yet you do not seem to realise that we are poisoning our childrens world because there is no way we can get rid of the waste. That is 'orders of magnitude' worse than you orders of magnitude mentioned above. How stupid are we as a society by crapping right in our own back yard by using technology which, although may look useful now, stores up serious long-term problems for our children. Dont you care?
As I said, we have all the clean unlimited energy technology we need, why not release it to the public?
Functionofx
Yet you do not seem to realise that we are poisoning our childrens world because there is no way we can get rid of the waste. That is 'orders of magnitude' worse than you orders of magnitude mentioned above. How stupid are we as a society by crapping right in our own back yard by using technology which, although may look useful now, stores up serious long-term problems for our children. Dont you care?
As I said, we have all the clean unlimited energy technology we need, why not release it to the public?
No, we really don't. Not even close. Not unless our government is willing to fund everyone as much as we've funded Warren Buffett - and even then we're still a couple decades away from what you claim is readily available today.
Really? How many wonderful degrees do you have in economics, nuclear engineering, power engineering, solar engineering??
Electrical engineering covered both power and semiconductors. Economics is a subset of my finance MBA, nuclear was paid for by Uncle Sam at his facility.
As I said, we have all the clean unlimited energy technology we need, why not release it to the public?
Volvo Driver
Quote:
No, we really don't. Not even close. Not unless our government is willing to fund everyone as much as we've funded Warren Buffett - and even then we're still a couple decades away from what you claim is readily available today.
Perhps you did not catch my previous post?
This post #108 where I argued that we already have unlimited power available.
Quote:
As I have said in other threads, craft flying in our skies hover silently, move very slowly or super fast at incredible angles, triangular or cigar-shaped, they are seen by many, many people. There is no doubt about this. What kind of power source can keep a huge craft sometimes perhaps thousands of yards long in the sky and then suddenly shoot off at amazing speeds?
So, I guess you are denying these craft are in our skies and/or they have a power source which provides them with virtually unlimited power?
Come on, thousands, possibly millions of people across the world have seen these by now, only a few people are left who will attribute these reports to swamp gas or whatever else.
Are you one of these swamp gas folks? If so, I dont think there are many others here on CD forums who deny these craft exist. That means you may be one of only a few people who still believe in swamp gas craft.
Functionofx
Yet you do not seem to realise that we are poisoning our childrens world because there is no way we can get rid of the waste. That is 'orders of magnitude' worse than you orders of magnitude mentioned above. How stupid are we as a society by crapping right in our own back yard by using technology which, although may look useful now, stores up serious long-term problems for our children. Dont you care?
As I said, we have all the clean unlimited energy technology we need, why not release it to the public?
Not really, no investment by me personally on nuclear, solar or wind. My preference is for natural gas. If thorium salt reactors become a thing, maybe. Traditional water reactors, are not something we should subsidize. Same for most power sources. Let viable power prevail and stop rigging subsidies for solar, wind and what not.
My point was the OP used a meaningless benchmark to determine viability of a power source.
Electrical engineering covered both power and semiconductors. Economics is a subset of my finance MBA, nuclear was paid for by Uncle Sam at his facility.
Wow, guess you are the go to guy on energy. So how did you decide on such a stupid benchmark as a single bankruptcy of a company to declare an entire energy supply system non-viable? Someone as smart as you could certainly present better.
LOL Lay people like you always think the unused technology hold some great potential. We have experimented with molten salt reactors since the beginning. There are very good reasons why light water moderated reactors predominate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
