RE: Hydrogen as SCAM?

From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 04 2003 - 13:45:04 MST

  • Next message: nanowave: "ephemeralization"

    Kai wrote:

    >
    > I have also seen several calculations that the total costs for fission
    > per MWh are much higher than for several alternatives. Of course, some
    > cost factors are much higher here, because we don't have wide deserts
    > for power plants or waste disposal.

    ### I agree with you that the usefulness of nuclear energy is to a large
    extent influenced by geographical and political factors - while e.g. the US
    could afford to set aside a few hundred square miles of desert to build a
    "National Nuclear Energy Park", with hundreds of power plants protected from
    terrorist attacks and most wars, in the densely populated parts of Europe
    this would be much more difficult if not impossible, greatly increasing the
    risk.

    This said, I really do not think that there is any appreciable risk from
    nuclear waste, whether in Europe or in the US. It's too easy to safely bury
    it underground, and there it does no harm.

    The main challenges to nuclear power (aside from irrational fears of the
    greens) are terrorism and the fact that the peaceful nuclear technologies
    can be easily subverted for weapon production. In the long run I would
    support nuclear energy only the international community ruthlessly destroys
    any regime which tries to develop it without adequate precations
    (inspections, direct, 24/7 surveillance, full transparency).

    Rafal



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 04 2003 - 13:39:48 MST