Obama Set to Go Nuclear?

Coal is a better way to go!

Coal has many other uses. Nuclear will never work for mobile power source, unless mobile means something as large as an ocean liner. Coal can be converted to fuel for mobile. Many chemicals now derived from oil can also be derived from coal, in fact many originally were.

So let nuclear generate electricity (of course some of it can could be used to produce hydrogen, which can be a mobile fuel) and let coal be used for other stuff. There's not a single answer to our energy and chemical needs. The more the merrier.

Thanks for showing your ignorance. That’s the thing about cold fusion — the bar keeps getting raised for it while the bar for plasma fusion gets lowered. Much of this is due to ignorance like yours, which is a fine example of a perpetual motion machine in itself.

According to Jed Rothwell, the excess heat experiment has been repeated worldwide roughly 14,000 times successfully according to an estimate by J. He (Front. Phys. China, 2007). There are 4,700 authors in his database. He says at least 2,000 have authored or co-authored experimental papers. He has counted major journal peer-reviewed papers reporting excess heat — more than 150 papers with more than 300 authors and co-authors in 50 publications. There are about 150 other papers describing other nuclear effects such as tritium and neutrons. They far outnumber the negative reports. In 1989 there were 20 negative peer-reviewed papers with 135 authors and coauthors. The reasons these early efforts failed are now well understood. There are also roughly 2,500 non peer reviewed papers including some excellent papers published by the U.S. Navy, Mitsubishi, Amoco, the Japanese Nat. Synchrotron Lab., Los Alamos, BARC and others that are much better than most peer-reviewed papers, in his opinion. You can read ~500 papers at LENR-CANR.org or at a university or national laboratory library. Most of the papers at LENR-CANR.org are copied from conference proceedings and from the libraries at Los Alamos and Georgia Tech, with permission. Plus he has copies of an additional 1,100 peer-reviewed papers that he cannot get permission to upload, regrettably.
http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_rel...e_if_you_say_so

More papers:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/reports/S...tedPapers.shtml

A typical cold fusion experiment using Seebeck calorimeter
costs roughly $50,000 including all equipment. Some have produced 50 to 300 megajoules in one run. They have achieved the two goals hot fusion has failed to reach for 60 years: breakeven and full ignition.

The Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) at the Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy cost “about a billion dollars” to construct and $70 million a year to operate. It produced 6 megajoules in one experiment, the world record run for hot fusion.

“Conservatives have usually been strong supporters of nuclear power. .. Had it not been for green opposition, the United States today might derive most of its electricity from nuclear power, as does France; thus the environmentalists must accept a large measure of responsibility for today’s most critical environmental problem.” ~ Kerry Emanuel - MIT http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2392194/posts?page=21#21 and here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2042332/posts?page=16#16

“One of the co-founders of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, says that the environmental organization is wrong for calling nuclear energy “evil.” He says, “We made the mistake of lumping nuclear energy in with nuclear weapons, as if all things nuclear were evil.” Moore, who left the organization in 1986 after 15 years of service, also lashed out at the movement he helped create saying, “That’s why I left Greenpeace: I could see that my fellow directors were taking the organization into what I call ‘pop environmentalism’ which uses sensationalism, misinformation, fear tactics to deal with people on an emotional level rather than an intellectual level.” ~ Brit Hume http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2002348/posts?page=2#2

Thanks for the links.

Thanks.....but things are never what they seem.

Cue to Hollywood to produce another nuke plant meltdown movie.

Agreed, its just that coal is cheap and plentiful. It has been demonized by the commies for so long we forgot how great a source it is. Much cheaper to build coal plants than nuculear.

Pray for America’s Freedom

Thanks for showing your ignorance. That’s the thing about cold fusion — the bar keeps getting raised for it while the bar for plasma fusion gets lowered. Much of this is due to ignorance like yours, which is a fine example of a perpetual motion machine in itself.

Ok, thats a bit harsh,

If it works and it is so much cheaper, where are the power plants, where the major experimental reactors, why are the greenies and scientists not screaming for further development?

I get it, it is a conspiracy right, they either have some thing against the scientist whom developed it, or its big oil, or the scientists that are behind plasma fusion, or.... you pick.

Its like all the stories that I heard about when I was in high school, the car that ran on water or got 200 mpg , some company bought up the plans and it hid them away and they were never produced, it's a bunch of crap.

Some engineer somewhere really had designed cold fusion that worked and was in anyway remotely feasible, reproducible and had any hope of becoming a major power source IT WOULD BE ALL OVER THE PLACE, you couldn't hide it, some country somewhere would be building the damn things and telling the oil companies to take a flying leap.

If some company had thought that any engineer was within a billion dollars of having a production model that even produced a megawatt of useful electricity they would make that engineer the richest man in the world, forget Bill Gates, and YOU COULD NOT HIDE IT, even if they bought the damn thing and all the plans and tried to hide, IT WOULDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, somebody somewhere would make one and say screw it, China for one would love the guy and be building the things tomorrow.

You crack me up; you’re way too tightly wound if not certifiable. Like I said, Intrade is not the indicator. I want to see the product.

I never realized how many suckers we have on this forum. From the Moon landing to Ron Paul to cold fusion, Paul Crouch and Kenneth Copeland, the lack of discernment is disconcerting.

You mean Ron Paul doesn't really exist? But I saw him. I SAW HIM.

If it works and it is so much cheaper, where are the power plants, where the major experimental reactors, why are the greenies and scientists not screaming for further development?
***They’re busy pouring $billions into Tokomak reactors. Your reasoning seems to be that if it were a real possibility, it would just magically appear.

I get it, it is a conspiracy right, they either have some thing against the scientist whom developed it, or its big oil, or the scientists that are behind plasma fusion, or.... you pick.
***I’ll pick the one about the scientists whose livelihood depends upon that guvmint paycheck they get from you & me. Why did the Wright brothers toil in obscurity for 5 years after they had invented the airplane? Using your reasoning, it all should have just magically happened over night. But it didn’t. Which conspiracy theory is responsible for that? Go ahead, you pick.

Its like all the stories that I heard about when I was in high school, the car that ran on water or got 200 mpg , some company bought up the plans and it hid them away and they were never produced, it’s a bunch of crap.
***No it isn’t like all those goofball stories. Show me where such a device was published in Physics Letters or by the American Chemical Society. No, you can’t. Because your analogy has a crapball blindside. I don’t mind that you’re so ignorant, what I mind is that you won’t put your money where your mouth is. I’ve already won money doing this at Intrade, not because there’s some goofball con game going on but because there are ignorant marks like you sounding off their big mouths. But you won’t do that, because your mouth is huge but there’s nothing to back it up.

Some engineer somewhere really had designed cold fusion that worked and was in anyway remotely feasible, reproducible and had any hope of becoming a major power source IT WOULD BE ALL OVER THE PLACE, you couldn’t hide it, some country somewhere would be building the damn things and telling the oil companies to take a flying leap.
***In 1903 there were 2 wily bicycle mechanics who made an airplane. Was their invention ALL OVER THE PLACE a month later? No. Was it prima facia evidence that they did not invent the airplane? No. But it is prima facia evidence that your ridiculous analogy is worthless.

If some company had thought that any engineer was within a billion dollars of having a production model that even produced a megawatt of useful electricity they would make that engineer the richest man in the world, forget Bill Gates, and YOU COULD NOT HIDE IT, even if they bought the damn thing and all the plans and tried to hide, IT WOULDN’T MAKE A DIFFERENCE, somebody somewhere would make one and say screw it, China for one would love the guy and be building the things tomorrow.
***What a stupid hypothetical. First of all, it presumes production model. It’s because of idiots like you that this technology hasn’t gotten that far. Then you presume that the companies would willingly make such an engineer rich, as if this was their primary purpose in life. Then you presume that they’d try to hide it, another ridiculous premise which actually argues against your own earlier premise that it couldn’t be hidden. Then you proceed along this assumption that this technology is supposed to be ready for production, which is a further reinforcement of the point I made earlier — that the bar is raised higher for cold fusion than for plasma fusion. Plasma fusion has 60 years, $billions of dollars pissed away, and maybe 10 seconds of fusion time. Cold fusion has 20 years, $millions, and maybe an accumulated 1 year of fusion time. But that doesn’t stop you from proceeding forth with your ridiculous assumptions and broken analogies. Thanks again for showing your ignorance. I just wish you’d put your money where your big mouth is.

You crack me up; you’re way too tightly wound if not certifiable. Like I said, Intrade is not the indicator.
***Sure it is. In this case it’s a fantastic indicator. It indicates that you are thoroughly ignorant AND that you won’t put your money where your mouth is, meaning that you’ll soon just scurry behind whatever rock you just came from. Who cares how tightly wound someone is if they’re offering you money to put up or shut up?

I want to see the product.
***And I want you to put your money where your mouth is or shut up. Looks like both of us don’t get what we want. You will continue to raise the bar for this scientific anomaly, no doubt, because you’re a bandwagon jumper. But you’ll soon see that the wheels are off this bandwagon you jumped on. Since we’ve spent so many $billions on plasma fusion, I want to see the product. Since we’ve spent 4 magnitudes more money on it, there should be 4 magnitudes more product. But how many Megajoules have been produced? 6? How many from cold fusion? 300-500, almost 2 orders of magnitude MORE than plasma fusion. But don’t let the facts stop you, you’ll continue to talk about how certifiable or tightly wound up someone is rather than put your money down. Run away home to mommy now, short pants.

Obummer is desperate!

Good, we need nuclear badly and it will alienate the leftist extremists in his base.

The most humiliating thing about our prima-donna approach to nuclear is that the rest of the world has now steamed ahead without us. There are 54 reactors under construction worldwide, none in the United States. In 2006, the Chinese sent over a delegation of nuclear officials to ask our advice about starting a reactor program. (I happened to meet them while visiting the Idaho National Lab.) They subsequently bought designs both from Westinghouse (now a Japanese company) and Areva, the French giant. Now they've done some reverse-engineering and have 16 reactors of their own design under construction as well. They're not asking our advice anymore. In 20 years, China will be selling mini-reactors at Wal-Mart. South Korea gets 45 percent of its electricity from nuclear (we're at 19 percent) and has entered the international market. For years they relied on foreign technology. Then in 1995 they took an old blueprint from Combustion Engineering and came up with their own design. They now build their own reactors, operating them at 95 percent annual capacity, the only country that beats our 90 percent.

Thanks neverdem. Same rule applies to nuclear power plants as the ANWR -- it'll be ten years before anything will reach market, so there's no point to authorizing it now. /lampoon alert

...an expansion of the loan guarantee for nuclear plants from $18 billion to $54 billion...

If nuclear energy's so great, and wind energy sucks so bad, why does nuclear need a "loan guarantee" from the Federal Government??

Isn't that a SUBSIDY ????