.. a cure for Sharia law and all that lashing crap.
We can build a hundred nuc power plants for the cost of funding the
war in iraq for a year , and be entirely free of imported
oil...reviving our economy and starving these sharia law cretins over
there who lash women to death. for getting gang raped.
Cost of a nuc plant on a per plant basis today 5 to 6 billion
dollars, takes 5 to 7 years. In mass production, identical,
components... 100 plants can be built at one time for considerably
less.. maybe less than 3 billion or so per plant.
further costs reductions possible by building fewer but larger
ones...viable in some locations such as serving big cities.
( safety/waste disposal... summary, the new ones for the last 20 years
in france (US design) no accidents ..ever. for the most part
intrinsically safe, compared to coal wich dumps high level
radioactives into the air, no risk at all. disposal of spend fuel
rods? These are largely reprocessed, net waste is at trace levels..
those decay to U238 in 200 years...not a long term issue either.)
Its the coal and oil lobbies who stopped Nuc power in the US (the
Gore family has extensive coal interests... producing more C02 than
all the cars and trucks in the world combined by a factor of 5 to one
Nuclear power plants eliminate massive C02 producing coal plants used
to power our cities.. and can use the power to produce hydrogen and
oxygen from water (comon). the hydrogen used to power cars and
trucks.. the oxygen can be released into LA to keep the illegals from
an expensive hydrogen infrastructure required though, cost about the
same as running the war in iraq for 20 minutes.
But our Israel controlled goverment** wants what is best for Israel, NOT
what is best for "We the people" of the U.S. They want us in Iraq and Iran.
So war it will be!
And the big oil companies (which also donate heavily to our elected
officials) would probably prefer that we not reduce our dependence on oil.
30 billion in U.S. aid to Israel...
"phil scott" wrote in message
yes indeedie, those are primary drivers apparently...those were
defused in much of the rest of the world, france and japan for
instance...but not in the good old USA.... real change apparently
happens only after defeat of one sort or the other.... then err
blowback occurs. .. we beeen seein' a liddo bit of dat..
Not really a solution to either problem although for base-loaded
electric generation it is a very attractive alternative. Only a very
small fraction of current generation is oil-fired and certainly whether
or not we use oil isn't going to make any difference whatsoever on a
culture's religious precepts.
entirely correct.... there are spin off factors however...for instance
the use of oil to fuel cars and trucks can be **displaced by
nuclear, . .as it is used to separate water into hydrogen and
then the hydrogen used to fuel cars etc.
this leaves us with oil needed for jet fuel, plastics and
fertilizers...our currently produced 60% handles that easily.... zero
And then what, Only Nuke powerplant corps will make money while now oil
companies make money, weapon and military companies make money, iraq
contractors which is everything from transportation of troops, food, fuel to
many vendors and other manufacturers make money. Besies we still don't have
a 'green way' to dispose of nuclear waste.
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:42:27 -0700, "Matt W. Barrow"
Historical U.S. Population Growth by year 1900-1998
Date Population Change Percent Change
July 1, 1998 270,298,524 2,554,929 0.95
July 1, 1997 267,743,595 2,553,801 0.96
July 1, 1996 265,189,794 2,424,846 0.92
July 1, 1995 262,764,948 2,475,711 0.95
July 1, 1994 260,289,237 2,543,134 0.98
July 1, 1993 257,746,103 2,751,586 1.07
July 1, 1992 254,994,517 2,867,115 1.13
July 1, 1991 252,127,402 2,688,690 1.07
July 1, 1990 249,438,712 2,619,482 1.06
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series
P-25, Nos. 311, 917, 1095 released on June 4, 1999.
Now that's a decline!
Can we agree as a world we consume more energy to do the things we do
than we need to. There have been many studies showing using our
energy more efficiently is more cost effective than consuming more.
I'm in the residential efficiency industry and for a small investment
at the time of construction we can reduce the heating and cooling 80%
or more. And in existing construction we can get 40-60% reduction.
The interesting thing is the house becomes healthier and more
comfortable with lower bills. Sounds like a solution to me.
This is only in the residential sector; let's apply this to
commercial, industry and transportation. WOW before we know it we can
start decommissioning power plants, capping oil wells and reducing the
mining of uranium.
Just a thought; what could one accomplish in energy efficiency by
spending a Trillion dollars on doing cost effective energy management?
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.