From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Jun 02 2003 - 21:24:08 MDT
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> (I'd suggest nuclear, but I don't think that could be done
> cheaply enough. No question that it could be done for
> enough money - civilian nuclear plants get their fuel
> from somewhere - just on the amount of mone when this
> is supposed to be cheap.)
Ah but the question is whether the cost of a nuclear reactor
is in the fuel or the shielding? [I actually suspect that
ship/sub based nuclear reactors are probably much cheaper than
the civilian power plant equivalents due to the lack of a
very large "containment" facility.]
Now if we need shielding one probably wants something with
a high hydrogen content. Hmmmm.... Humans are mostly water.
Water is 2/3 hydrogen. Wouldn't a selection of luddites
(Rifken, Bill Joy, select members of the ETC group, a number
of European officials opposed to GMO, etc.) do the job?
The only thing I'm worried about is that there may not
be enough true luddites to provide sufficient shielding.
Damn.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 21:37:08 MDT