2009/8/11 Paul Houle <p...@ontology2.com>: > Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > The waste issue is complex, but I can tell you one thing. The current > LWR extracts only 2% of the energy in it's fuel. Future reactors could > extract much more of that: there's enough energy sitting in the spent fuel > system in the US to power the country for centuries: a closed fuel cycle > could put a stop to Uranium mining for generations. Yes, the technology > isn't there yet, but we've still got decades to develop it.
why should we (or you) focus on the development of an industry-scale-technology with high potential risk, if the sun sends far more energy for free than we need, without either the risk of a MCA nor the waste-problem, which also scales much better (less dependance from big industries and the risk that they set profit before safety) and offers the possibility of decentralized energy production? The only reason I see are lobbyists ;-) cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
