[Vision2020] Idaho Governor Otter Asks US Energy Secretary Chu About the Future of Nuclear Energy

Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
Wed Jul 8 16:42:52 PDT 2009


The claim is made, and disputed, in the article below, that the US stores
some of France's nuclear waste, because the US did not want them to store it
in France, not that France needs to store it in the US:

https://cleantech.com/news/2162/french-nuclear-waste-being-stored-in-the-u-s

But without more research into this question, I'm not sure what the truth
is; and it's possible the truth might be a matter of "national security" and
thus hard to verify.
----------------------
But NASA climate scientist James Hansen in the following presentation,
presents a case from Tom Blee's "Prescription for the Planet" that 4th
generation nuclear power (fast or breeder reactors) addresses the waste
problem and availability of nuclear fuel.   Currently stored waste can be
burned to generate energy.  And the reactor designs can be made very safe
regarding accidents.  If these claims are true, nuclear power becomes more
practical.  I suppose the objections regarding terrorism or proliferation of
nuclear weapon materials might still be a problem, but with good security
measures, which we already have given the thousands of nuclear weapons the
US must secure, these problems can be addressed:

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2008/20080804_TripReport.pdf
---------------------
I've been reading British scientist James Lovelock (who has issued dire
warnings regarding climate change) on nuclear power.  He also advocates it
as a solution to the climate change crisis, claiming the dangers of nuclear
power are exaggerated.

I'd rather see solar electric or thermal, wind, biofuels, geothermal, hydro,
tidal and wave, fuel cells, hydrogen or nuclear fusion, if this technology
can be developed, be rolled out as fast as possible to get humanity off
fossil fuels as soon as possible.  The evidence I have read on these
alternative energy sources indicate the potential is enough to supply
humanity's energy needs, and the base load problem with solar and wind has
solutions.  Solar thermal can address the base load problem of no power when
the sun goes down or on cloudy days, by storing fantastic amounts of heat
that can generate electricity at night (molton salt thermal storage).  Wind
can pump water to higher elevations when wind is abundant to generate hydro
power when wind is down.  Read on this incredible claim from the National
Academy of Sciences regarding wind power potential:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=winds-power-potential-quantified-09-06-26

In a report in the *Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences,*researchers calculate that U.S. wind turbines could produce
16 times the
electricity we now use. Karen Hopkin reports
----------------------------------------------

But if these more advanced nuclear power plants can be built without
exorbitant cost, and address the problems with nuclear power mentioned
above, I'd rather have nuclear power than runaway climate change, given that
the alternative energy technologies mentioned may not be rolled out fast
enough.

Ted Moffett
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

>   I'm afraid I don't have the authority to speak for France.
>
> I think we should create more base energy with more nuclear plants, and
> *also* invest in wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, wave power, and any
> other type of power we can find.  We're going to need the energy.
>
> Paul
>
> --- On *Wed, 7/8/09, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>* wrote:
>
>
> From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho Governor Otter Asks US Energy Secretary Chu
> About the Future of Nuclear Energy
> To: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Moscow Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>, "Ted Moffett" <
> starbliss at gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 2:34 PM
>
>
> Paul Rumelhart stated:
>
> " . . . the half-life of the waste by-products would be reduced to decades
> instead of thousands of years.  The waste is more manageable . . . "
>
> That certainly explains why France wants to dump their nuclear waste right
> here in Idaho, instead of Nevada where the locals are up in arms over
> their current pile of "manageable" nuclear waste, or at home in France
> where . . . uh . . . uh . . . why isn't France securing their own nuclear
> waste, Paul?
>
> Why not create energy with windpower . . .
>
> http://www.windpowerexpo.org/
>
> The waste produced by windpower is far more manageable, probably because
> there isn't any.
>
> And, besides, this gives me an opportunity to share my favorite song from
> "Paint Your Wagon" with y'all . . .
>
> "They Call the Wind Maria"
> http://www.TomandRodna.com/Songs/Wind_Maria.mp3<http://www.tomandrodna.com/Songs/Wind_Maria.mp3>
>
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
> and the Realist adjusts his sails."
>
> - Unknown
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090708/f838b19e/attachment.html 


More information about the Vision2020 mailing list