Solar vs. whatever
From
Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to
All on Thu Jan 5 18:48:00 2017
PBS had an interesting segment on their nightly news last evening. It was
part of a bigger NOVA episode that they said was scheduled to run on 1/10.
The segment was about alternative forms of nuclear power. They mentioned a couple of alt nuclear alternatives that both were actually from the early
days of nuclear power. The "alt" technologies do not use water as a coolant and supposedly will shut themselves down rather than overheat due to the different "ingredients" used. One of the two types can even use the
depleated plutonium waste that is currently being stockpiled in Paducah, KY. This guy they were interviewing, who used to work for M$, said there was
enough of this waste at Paducah alone to power the US for ~ 700 years.
These technologies lost out to water-cooled nuke power when the Navy selected it for powering the Nautalus. Because of the aforementioned "shutting themselves down" behavior, they are touted as being safer that conventional nuke power.
Another thing they mentioned... the US has ~ 100 nuke facilities online right now, and most all of them will have reached replacement age around 2030.
They asked the question about what might replace them. They mentioned solar and wind but, without serious advances in battery tech to store power "on the grid," they ruled both out as suitable replacements for anything we currently have.
... So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
--- MultiMail/IBMPcDos v0.43
þ Synchronet þ CCO BBS * capcity2.synchro.net * 1-502-875-8938