Supporters on nuclear power on this list should have a look at the
following (script and powerpoint show to be read together):
http://www.nirs.org/nukerelapse/neconomics/brussels.pdf
http://www.nirs.org/nukerelapse/neconomics/jimharding382007.pdf
And it scarcely touches on what for me are the two really big problems
of the nuclear industry - looking after the nuclear waste for thousands
of years, and the fact that reactor uranium ends up in weapons
production (both nukes and depleted uranium). Nor does it touch on the
inadequacies of the inspection regime at the mines.
This is way way way off topic (I'm contributing because it's something I
know a lot more about than Linux...). If that's OK on this list it's
fine with me. But if it isn't, anyone who wants to discuss off-list can
contact me at mark@lowenergydesign.com
Mark
Dave Hall wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 11:00:17AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>
>>Scott Walde wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>If Saskpower had any brains and less political interference...they
>>>would build a nuclear reactor at La Loche, and string some lines over
>>>to Fort Mc.
>>>
>>>
>>I'm curious why we don't hear much about building a reactor right in the
>>oil patch and using the power for oil extraction rather than burning up
>>a large chunk of the petroleum they extract.
>>
>>I'm sure they'd go through enough power to keep a reactor busy.
>>
>>
>
>Burn fossil fuel, environmentalists whine to the government to take action.
>Build a nuclear plant, protesters show up on your doorstep. Which would
>choose?
>
>Also, the tar sands are only economically viable when the price of oil is
>sky high. A nuclear plant is a pretty big capital investment for something
>that might not be useful in a couple of years.
>
>I think a nuclear plant is a great idea but I think it should be planned as
>a source of electrical energy for anyone willing to pay for it. OTOH, that
>could still work in the tar sands as a market hedge if it's no longer
>economical to extract the oil, keep the plant and sell the electricity.
>
>
>
Received on Wed Mar 28 23:32:11 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Mar 28 2007 - 23:32:16 CST