Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Which is why we need to get rid of the old obsolete light water reactors and start using reactors that can't melt down, don't need to run at high pressure and don't need copious amounts of water for coolingNo one died because ot 3 Mile IslandFukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
And if you took that attitude over such a small number of failures you would never get in a plane again or drive a car or have a propane tank in your home etc etc etc.
We have already designed reactors that cannot melt down, that don't need to run at pressures of hundreds of times atmosphere and that can use the waste from our obsolete LWRs as fuel. We have enough of that nuclear waste in storage to power the country for at least a century
France has had up to 80% of their electricity provided by nuclear power and no significant accidents
A fatal plane or car accident is not a threat to the planet. Fukushima literally could have eradiated the ocean. All it takes is one bad meltdown to potentially poison most of the world, that's all. Japan is right now seriously planning on releasing radioactive water from fukushima into the ocean after everything that has happened.
Disposal of Nuclear waste is one of the major issues, however it wouldn't be if they'd catch up to my solution of changing the molecular structure of the waste to change it's properties to make it harmless to the environment when stored or disposed of.Cheaper, cleaner, more reliable.
The US could gain actual energy independence by nationalizing a nuclear power project.
Nuclear power is clean and safe. Why aren't we using more of it?
Nuclear energy is far safer than its reputation implies. It's also clean and reliable -- yet power plants are being phased out around the world.www.cnet.com
We have the capability to drill holes miles deep to get oil we can do the same thing to bury nuclear wasteDisposal of Nuclear waste is one of the major issues, however it wouldn't be if they'd catch up to my solution of changing the molecular structure of the waste to change itcs properties to make it harmless to the environment when stored or disposed of.Cheaper, cleaner, more reliable.
The US could gain actual energy independence by nationalizing a nuclear power project.
Nuclear power is clean and safe. Why aren't we using more of it?
Nuclear energy is far safer than its reputation implies. It's also clean and reliable -- yet power plants are being phased out around the world.
This can be done with the atom writer laser technology I proposed back in the late 90's.
It also can be used to solve our regular waste disposing/dumping problems that exist around the globe, especially major cities.
It has so many years contained before seeping out and contaminating.We have the capability to drill holes miles deep to get oil we can do the same thing to bury nuclear wasteDisposal of Nuclear waste is one of the major issues, however it wouldn't be if they'd catch up to my solution of changing the molecular structure of the waste to change itcs properties to make it harmless to the environment when stored or disposed of.Cheaper, cleaner, more reliable.
The US could gain actual energy independence by nationalizing a nuclear power project.
Nuclear power is clean and safe. Why aren't we using more of it?
Nuclear energy is far safer than its reputation implies. It's also clean and reliable -- yet power plants are being phased out around the world.
This can be done with the atom writer laser technology I proposed back in the late 90's.
It also can be used to solve our regular waste disposing/dumping problems that exist around the globe, especially major cities.
And if we start implementing the use of smaller MSR reactors we can actually use the waste we have stored right now to fuel the new reactors.
We have enough waste just sitting around to power this country for at least a century
Helium occurs naturally wherever there are uranium deposits.Hmm. The USA is the only nation who owns helium. Because of sanctions you stopped the delivery of helium to Zeppelin and LZ 129 "Hindenburg", which had been constructed for the use of helium, exploded in Lake Hurst in 1937.Tons of new and safer designs these days. A helium pebble bed reactor is meltdown proof, for instance.Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
Why? I doubt this. We have uranium but no helium. As far as I heard is the USA the only nation which has helium. This means for my homecountry Germany: Don't try to use helium. This will cause problems. ... Okay ... I see now ... Helium is an dispensing process of radioactive processes with uranium - it's alpha radiation. And helium is also part of natural gas ... hmmm .... Strange ... why all this deep hate from the USA against Germany and Germans? Has this to do with your aircraft and military industry? Airships are relativelly cheap - they are not dangerous - and very bad war weapons. One needs only a big mast and an airport is ready. Transport costs are not very important. And airships are able to transport tons of material. The ideal transport medium asides railroads in the landmass Euro-Asia - and a good way how Europe, Russia and China could work together.Helium occurs naturally wherever there are uranium deposits.Hmm. The USA is the only nation who owns helium. Because of sanctions you stopped the delivery of helium to Zeppelin and LZ 129 "Hindenburg", which had been constructed for the use of helium, exploded in Lake Hurst in 1937.Tons of new and safer designs these days. A helium pebble bed reactor is meltdown proof, for instance.Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
You doubt it? It's chemistry in action, kid. Look it up.Why? I doubt this. We have uranium but no helium. As far as I heard is the USA the only nation which has helium. This means for my homcountry Germany from my personal point of view: Don't try to use helium. This will cause problems.Helium occurs naturally wherever there are uranium deposits.Hmm. The USA is the only nation who owns helium. Because of sanctions you stopped the delivery of helium to Zeppelin and LZ 129 "Hindenburg", which had been constructed for the use of helium, exploded in Lake Hurst in 1937.Tons of new and safer designs these days. A helium pebble bed reactor is meltdown proof, for instance.Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
The best energy is the energy we don't have to produce.Nuclear energy is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Mainly because of the redundant systems needed to keep accidents from happening and the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
So... don't think that it's a good idea. Cheap energy is much better.
I doubt everything - specially if English speaking people and Hochdeutsch speaking people say something. Read again what I wrote. I live in a dîfferent time sphere. I need some time to think. In the moment I think about a solar membrane around an airship.You doubt it? It's chemistry in action, kid. Look it up.Why? I doubt this. We have uranium but no helium. As far as I heard is the USA the only nation which has helium. This means for my homcountry Germany from my personal point of view: Don't try to use helium. This will cause problems.Helium occurs naturally wherever there are uranium deposits.Hmm. The USA is the only nation who owns helium. Because of sanctions you stopped the delivery of helium to Zeppelin and LZ 129 "Hindenburg", which had been constructed for the use of helium, exploded in Lake Hurst in 1937.Tons of new and safer designs these days. A helium pebble bed reactor is meltdown proof, for instance.Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
Helium comes from the radioactive decay of minerals such as uranium and thorium. It is constantly being produced underground.You doubt it? It's chemistry in action, kid. Look it up.Why? I doubt this. We have uranium but no helium. As far as I heard is the USA the only nation which has helium. This means for my homcountry Germany from my personal point of view: Don't try to use helium. This will cause problems.Helium occurs naturally wherever there are uranium deposits.Hmm. The USA is the only nation who owns helium. Because of sanctions you stopped the delivery of helium to Zeppelin and LZ 129 "Hindenburg", which had been constructed for the use of helium, exploded in Lake Hurst in 1937.Tons of new and safer designs these days. A helium pebble bed reactor is meltdown proof, for instance.Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 mile Island
3 reasons right there,
www.epa.gov
It has so many years contained before seeping out and contaminating.We have the capability to drill holes miles deep to get oil we can do the same thing to bury nuclear wasteDisposal of Nuclear waste is one of the major issues, however it wouldn't be if they'd catch up to my solution of changing the molecular structure of the waste to change itcs properties to make it harmless to the environment when stored or disposed of.Cheaper, cleaner, more reliable.
The US could gain actual energy independence by nationalizing a nuclear power project.
Nuclear power is clean and safe. Why aren't we using more of it?
Nuclear energy is far safer than its reputation implies. It's also clean and reliable -- yet power plants are being phased out around the world.
This can be done with the atom writer laser technology I proposed back in the late 90's.
It also can be used to solve our regular waste disposing/dumping problems that exist around the globe, especially major cities.
And if we start implementing the use of smaller MSR reactors we can actually use the waste we have stored right now to fuel the new reactors.
We have enough waste just sitting around to power this country for at least a century
My atom write laser specs along with
an Austrian discovery on changing characteristics of the smallest particles, can solve waste disposal for the nuke industry and big city waste management.
Which also solves much of the waste (plastics) ending up in our poluted oceans (from transport and dumps on Islands that get swept back into the sea).
Which is why we should be building reactors that don't need all those redundant systems because the are self limiting. We don't need huge concrete and steel containment domes for reactors that run at atmosphere rather than under high pressure.Nuclear energy is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Mainly because of the redundant systems needed to keep accidents from happening and the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
So... don't think that it's a good idea. Cheap energy is much better.
There is so much wrong in that post.Nuclear energy is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Mainly because of the redundant systems needed to keep accidents from happening and the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
So... don't think that it's a good idea. Cheap energy is much better.
.jpg.aspx)
$millions/oz. rather than "Billions"? Sun power is still way cheaper, safer, and cleaner. Plus one can find actual investors. No need for those massively subsidized roads, insurance programs, bombing target, or bomb making worries. I forget, has any nuke plant ever turned a profit yet? I don't think so,.. maybe one,.. but, oh boy how we've blown shit up with that stuff, amiright!>the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
No, no, no. Here is a picture of a typical nuclear fuel assembly....
>$millions/oz. rather than "Billions"The nuke lobby remains slick and desperate to con everyone as ever.
$millions/oz. rather than "Billions"? Sun power is still way cheaper, safer, and cleaner. Plus one can find actual investors. No need for those massively subsidized roads, insurance programs, bombing target, or bomb making worries. I forget, has any nuke plant ever turned a profit yet? I don't think so,.. maybe one,.. but, oh boy how we've blown stuff up with that stuff, amiright!>the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
No, no, no. Here is a picture of a typical nuclear fuel assembly....
www.instituteforenergyresearch.org
That was a question.>$millions/oz. rather than "Billions"
And the price of tea in China? The "fuel rods", Pyle. Factor in all the costs.Uranium ore costs less than $100 per pound before being processed into uranium oxide fuel pellets for use in that fuel assembly.
I do and have for many years. Why don't you?Why don't you have solar panels on your roof then?
Link? Quote? Anything?There are 93 power reactors in the US. The large majority are profitable.
Or just have individual hydrogen units the size of a emergency generator, power household and plugin cars -the waste product of such is merely water.It has so many years contained before seeping out and contaminating.We have the capability to drill holes miles deep to get oil we can do the same thing to bury nuclear wasteDisposal of Nuclear waste is one of the major issues, however it wouldn't be if they'd catch up to my solution of changing the molecular structure of the waste to change itcs properties to make it harmless to the environment when stored or disposed of.Cheaper, cleaner, more reliable.
The US could gain actual energy independence by nationalizing a nuclear power project.
Nuclear power is clean and safe. Why aren't we using more of it?
Nuclear energy is far safer than its reputation implies. It's also clean and reliable -- yet power plants are being phased out around the world.
This can be done with the atom writer laser technology I proposed back in the late 90's.
It also can be used to solve our regular waste disposing/dumping problems that exist around the globe, especially major cities.
And if we start implementing the use of smaller MSR reactors we can actually use the waste we have stored right now to fuel the new reactors.
We have enough waste just sitting around to power this country for at least a century
My atom write laser specs along with
an Austrian discovery on changing characteristics of the smallest particles, can solve waste disposal for the nuke industry and big city waste management.
Which also solves much of the waste (plastics) ending up in our poluted oceans (from transport and dumps on Islands that get swept back into the sea).Which is why we should be building reactors that don't need all those redundant systems because the are self limiting. We don't need huge concrete and steel containment domes for reactors that run at atmosphere rather than under high pressure.Nuclear energy is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Mainly because of the redundant systems needed to keep accidents from happening and the fuel rods are the most expensive materials on the planet. (Billions/ounce)
So... don't think that it's a good idea. Cheap energy is much better.
Smaller reactors can be built in a factory and shipped by rail all for a fraction of the cost of the old obsolete light water reactors.
Good for you. At least you practice what you preach. Please share their capacity and cost.
I do and have for many years. Why don't you?Why don't you have solar panels on your roof then?
