Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion The staggering cost of new nuclear power
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post will appear after it is approved by moderators
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Don Libby  
View profile  
 More options Jan 8 2009, 5:43 pm
From: "Don Libby" <dli...@tds.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:43:36 -0600
Local: Thurs, Jan 8 2009 5:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Global Change: 3072] Re: The staggering cost of new nuclear power
From: "Eric Swanson" <e_swan...@skybest.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.science.general.global-change
To: "globalchange" <globalchange@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:30 AM
Subject: [Global Change: 3072] Re: The staggering cost of new nuclear power

> Besides, coal plants capture
>most of the particulate emissions from the exhaust stack, which would
>also tend to capture the uranium as well.

And what then?

>We are in Iraq because the supposed threats
>of WMD, such as "dirty bombs".  The "dirt" in the dirty bomb was the
>highly radioactive component of nuclear waste, i.s., plutonium.

The term "dirty bomb" does not refer to fallout from a nuclear device, it
refers to a small explosive device to which some radioactive material (like
cesium) has been added to increase its value as a terror weapon, not a WMD.

>Given the threats presented by all those bad actors out there, does
>anyone really think that it would be possible to contain all those
>waste products with 100% perfection for 10,000 years?

The earth contains radioactive elements quite well, and for longer than
10,000 years.

>Even the
>Government's best efforts at Yucca Mountain have not been worked out.

The Government's best efforts are not at YM Nevada, they are at Carlsbad,
New Mexico, where a waste repository has interred thousands of shipments of
transuranic waste since it began operations almost ten years ago.

> Let's hope we never find out whether
>the containment buildings are indeed strong enough to withstand such
>an assault..

We already have - it's been done.  Nothing happend to the containment, but
the airplane was destroyed.

Learn these interesting and important facts, and many more, by reading this
book by a one time antinuke:  http://cravenspowertosavetheworld.com/

-dl


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.