To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Nuclear power is safe....Tell that to the Russians...and the folks in Hiroshima.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Somehow, someway Environazis will make it their mission in life to prevent this from ever coming to market. And Liberals everywhere will be offended and blame Conservatives for any advancement in this area. Bank on it.
3 posted on
08/22/2012 9:28:03 AM PDT by
Obadiah
(If Reagan had another son he would have looked like Paul Ryan.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Oooonly Threeee Thousand Yeeeears! Thaaaat’s not sustainabllllle!
< /watermelon>
4 posted on
08/22/2012 9:30:37 AM PDT by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Interesting. Very interesting. Thorium is another good source for fuel.
5 posted on
08/22/2012 9:30:37 AM PDT by
techcor
(I hope Obama succeeds, in being a one term president.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
A buddy took delivery of a Rossi-Focardi Nickel-Hydrogen fusion reactor a few weeks ago. He paid $4K for it and so far is satisfied. Why isn’t fusion being considered as a cheap energy source by this article?
7 posted on
08/22/2012 9:40:21 AM PDT by
BuffaloJack
(Repeal Obamacare, the CITIZENSHIP TAX)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Brings new meaning to the sign some scientists put on their door “Gone fission.”
11 posted on
08/22/2012 9:44:26 AM PDT by
Hillarys Gate Cult
(Liberals make unrealistic demands on reality and reality doesn't oblige them.)
To: zot
12 posted on
08/22/2012 9:45:19 AM PDT by
GreyFriar
(Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It’s only safe for grown ups.
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
15 posted on
08/22/2012 9:51:08 AM PDT by
jonno
(Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
20 posted on
08/22/2012 10:02:41 AM PDT by
Captain Beyond
(The Hammer of the gods! (Just a cool line from a Led Zep song))
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
" New nuclear fuel source would power human race until 5000AD" 5,000 A.D.? It will take that long just to get the permits to build a new reactor.
21 posted on
08/22/2012 10:03:01 AM PDT by
Flag_This
(Real presidents don't bow.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Reactors operating in the US are 30-40 year old designs. That and we haven’t reprocessed spent fuel rods for close to 40 years. In the mean time other countries have surpassed us in nuclear plant design, with improved efficiencies, safety, and cycle life. We have even let our military outpace our commercial reactors with their technology, and most of the people operating commercial plants are former Navy trained personnel.
If you want to get serious about nuclear power, lift the spent fuel reprocessing ban, develop a standard reprocessing progam, and license the building and use of a standardized proven reactor design. The US is 30 years behind the rest of the world in terms of nuclear power generation, it’s time to catch up.
42 posted on
08/22/2012 10:45:55 AM PDT by
factoryrat
(We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Reactors operating in the US are 30-40 year old designs. That and we haven’t reprocessed spent fuel rods for close to 40 years. In the mean time other countries have surpassed us in nuclear plant design, with improved efficiencies, safety, and cycle life. We have even let our military outpace our commercial reactors with their technology, and most of the people operating commercial plants are former Navy trained personnel.
If you want to get serious about nuclear power, lift the spent fuel reprocessing ban, develop a standard reprocessing progam, and license the building and use of a standardized proven reactor design. The US is 30 years behind the rest of the world in terms of nuclear power generation, it’s time to catch up.
43 posted on
08/22/2012 10:46:09 AM PDT by
factoryrat
(We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
At the moment people don't use nuclear power much (the UK's small and aged nuclear fleet can barely generate four times as much power as its wind farms, showing just how little energy we're talking about here: just 8 per cent of our national energy needs are derived from nuclear right now). As a result there's no scarcity of uranium, and indeed nobody has bothered exploring for more of it for decades.
Leave it to the Brits to ignore the French who get 75% of their electricity from nuclear power.
50 posted on
08/22/2012 12:42:08 PM PDT by
aruanan
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
And even if you think nuclear bombs are OK, the fearmongers have always added that there just isn't enough uranium about to keep the lights on for long.
Get rid of the ban on reprocessing of spent fuel rods and recover over 90% of the uranium that went into them. Use fast breeder reactors and make lots and lots of fuel. Between all these and thorium reactors, we can cover all electrical needs for longer than the human race has been around and doing anything more technical than using fire-hardened sticks for hunting.
56 posted on
08/22/2012 1:56:34 PM PDT by
aruanan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson