It's a negative cost. I enjoy programming games, and would rather do that than, say, see Sector 9 for free. Thus, I'm getting the same amount of "jollies" by programming, but spending less cash.
"Bacteria Used To Make Radioactive Metals Inert" implies that the bacteria are making radioactive metals non-radioactive. A better title might be "Bacteria Used to make Poisonous Heavy Metals Inert," or "Bacteria Turn Radioactive Heavy Metals Into Chemically Inert Radioactive Stuff That Is Easier To Clean Up."
</science-nitpickery>
You misunderstand. What they're saying is that the bacteria that are used to create radioactive materials are in and of themselves not radioactive.
Plus, I live close enough to Chernobyl to know that nuclear power is simply not acceptable. Unless you just love thyroid cancer. Plus, I live close enough to the Hudson Bay to know that air travel is simply not acceptable. Unless you just love getting crushed to death.
Those are reserves. Not resources. Above and beyond seawater uranium, there are tons of locations that haven't been prospected yet, chiefly because uranium was so ridiculously easy to locate they stopped looking for it sometime in the '50s or '60s.
And given how little of the price for nuclear power is due to fuel, even a tenfold increase in uranium prices would hardly have a noticeable effect.
That's a completely different project, based on completely different principles. Polywell Fusion doesn't use the ring confinement structure that a Tokamak does, which means that it avoids several significant issues.
The Polywell Inertial Electrostatic Confinement design is showing a lot of promise, and the current estimate is the tech will be ready for commercial use in 12 years or so.
No, if it displeases environmentalists, it will be because it displeases environmentalists. The correlation between things that are clean and good for the environment (such as nuclear power), and the things that please environmentalists is not very strong.
Slashdot Mirror
If you replace the lens in your eye with an artificial one, you can see into the near UV.
Apparently your retina is sensitive to frequencies that normally get filtered out.
Regardless of whether or not they're intelligent, dolphins are massive jerks.
Even more so than humans.
Tarn Adams makes money from giving Dwarf Fortress away for free.
It's a negative cost. I enjoy programming games, and would rather do that than, say, see Sector 9 for free. Thus, I'm getting the same amount of "jollies" by programming, but spending less cash.
<science-nitpickery>
"Bacteria Used To Make Radioactive Metals Inert" implies that the bacteria are making radioactive metals non-radioactive. A better title might be "Bacteria Used to make Poisonous Heavy Metals Inert," or "Bacteria Turn Radioactive Heavy Metals Into Chemically Inert Radioactive Stuff That Is Easier To Clean Up."
</science-nitpickery>
You misunderstand. What they're saying is that the bacteria that are used to create radioactive materials are in and of themselves not radioactive.
Plus, I live close enough to Chernobyl to know that nuclear power is simply not acceptable. Unless you just love thyroid cancer.
Plus, I live close enough to the Hudson Bay to know that air travel is simply not acceptable. Unless you just love getting crushed to death.
Those are reserves. Not resources. Above and beyond seawater uranium, there are tons of locations that haven't been prospected yet, chiefly because uranium was so ridiculously easy to locate they stopped looking for it sometime in the '50s or '60s.
And given how little of the price for nuclear power is due to fuel, even a tenfold increase in uranium prices would hardly have a noticeable effect.
That's a completely different project, based on completely different principles. Polywell Fusion doesn't use the ring confinement structure that a Tokamak does, which means that it avoids several significant issues.
The Polywell Inertial Electrostatic Confinement design is showing a lot of promise, and the current estimate is the tech will be ready for commercial use in 12 years or so.
Yep. And different colors of placebo perform differently depending on what they're supposedly for.
I believe it's because the Lego Corporation's rule was "no modern weapons" - that is, space lasers and blunderbusses are OK, but not more modern guns.
No, if it displeases environmentalists, it will be because it displeases environmentalists. The correlation between things that are clean and good for the environment (such as nuclear power), and the things that please environmentalists is not very strong.
Uranium was so easy to find they stopped prospecting for it sometime in the 1950s or 1960s.
Given how crappy wind farms are as a power source, I don't think that's a very good example.
Construction worker.
Drop a bridge on 'em.
You can do your plumbing in the dark.
But it's the wife that gets the headache.
Just add some acid, right?
Nuclear reactors do not work that way.
It improves going downhill.
Which is why you should look at the Bagger 288 instead.
Then mentally transport it, and tear down the little contemptible hill.
You just stole that account from the TRRosen who's a figment of '''my''' imagination.
Now give it back.
Godwin's law.
You lose.
It's worse than I had ever thought possible!
Time to call Batman AND Captain Planet!
Like, say, whales.