- Staff
- #76
Eracer said:AMEN - but who owns the water? How are we going to make money off hydrogen power? Oh yeah, we need electricity (lots of it) to make hydrogen. So we'll still need coal, or nuclear, or whatever. Eventually, the world might figure out that there are some things (things that are ESSENTIAL FOR THE SURVIVAL OF THE SPECIES) that should not be profitable - financially or politically. Things that should be built by and for the people of the planet. Fusion plants making hydrogen. Yeah - that's the ticket..
We all own the water. Hydrogen is a by product of nuclear power in Can-Do reactors. The uranium isn't enriched in a Can-Do, which is why they sell them to places like China, Hungary and France.
And no, enriched uranium would be no different buried back in the ground from which it came. Northern Saskatchewan (which mines 30% of the world's uranium, and the best variety) is incredibly unactive seismically and protected from watersheds. It's been housing the very same uranium for millions of years with zero impact environmentally. It's a win/win all around. Now if we could just get the public to realize that nuclear power isn't the same as a mushroom cloud....
Eracer said:You said:
Uranium, which is radioactive when it is mined, could be placed in the very mine it came from after power production with ZERO chance of environmental issue.
Isn't the depleted uranium that comes out of a power plant still thousands of times more radioactive than the uranium ore in a mine? And what about the radioactive isotopes (with the 50,000 year half-lives) produced during fission? Don't get me wrong - I think we absolutely need to ramp up nuclear power production in the world. You know geology. I'm just curious about the veracity of your statement..
I've pretty much answered this above. Uranium is radioactive right out of the ground. I actually have some pitchblende in my office at work. Worried? Maybe if I carried it in my pocket for the next 40 years, MAYBE...And again, Can-Do reactors don't enrich uranium to weapons grade or anything close to it...
Eracer said:You said:
Status symbols. If gas was $5 a gallon, you'd bet your ass that 90% of people would think twice about owning one if it was costing them $1600 a month in gas to run it.
How about this - An RFID implanted in every vehicle that tells the gas pump what your MPG rating is (the RFID is updated by the computer in your car). If it's 50 MPG you pay $2.00 per gallon. If it's 15 MPG, you pay $20.00 per gallon.
I like this idea. But I think theft and fakes would run rampant. I really think you should nail people at the license desk for this. Put the extra charge into an alternative fuel fund.
I hope this answers some questions, or creates new ones...
R35