Hi,
Solar? That may be the way of the future, but they've been playing with it almost as long as they've played with nuclear and it still has many unsolved problems.
So, yeah. Intelligent, informed people have more faith in an established and mature technology than they do in something that's still failing to prove itself after more than four decades of development.
--Pete
Quote:How come you all believe that technological advance will solve all problems for nuclear power, but not for solar power?We don't. The fact is that breeder reactors exist and have been in use for decades. The fact is that reclaiming fissionable fuel from spent rods is being done, has been done for decades (that's how you get plutonium). The fact is that disposal of the remaining waste is a solved problem, mostly solved by the French. The only 'problems' with nuclear are the restrictions based on non-proliferation treaties and the social problem of vast numbers of ignorant voters who piss their pants in fear of everything nuclear. Nuclear is *yesterday's* technology as witnessed by the percentage of the world's energy generated that way.
Solar? That may be the way of the future, but they've been playing with it almost as long as they've played with nuclear and it still has many unsolved problems.
So, yeah. Intelligent, informed people have more faith in an established and mature technology than they do in something that's still failing to prove itself after more than four decades of development.
Quote:Btw, notice how that 85 years is based on consumption in 2004? When taking progress into account, the article estimates supplies to be sufficient up to ... 2025. Anyone thinks we will have that super technology by then?Gee, I don't know. We had it by the mid '50s, but maybe we lost it? No. I think they still have it at Hanford. Maybe we can get them to share.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?