The rate of fusion research was set when we figured out we'd run out of uranium and coal around 2100. That was back in the 1970s. The rate is pretty much fixed because the work force has too have PhDs to do the work and you have to have PhD advisors to get more PhDs. Big bottleneck. There are some nonstandard approaches, but the big programs can't be accelerated much.
No, we can't replace coal with nuclear because cooling resouces are already strained with coal. You can go up in efficency with natural gas, but not down with nuclear. Best to limit use of thermal generation going forward.
Thermal power plant need cooling and nuclear need the most to protect the fuel. Already cooling resouces are limited and will become more so. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
China will ban new coal mines for three years: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/... The US will do the same or more since a federal judge ruled last year that mining permits must consider greenhouse gas emissions.
Rail guns make your suggestion impractical. Nuclear plants can't be defended from intercontinental rail guns. Must use dispersed power source in future if the kinds of conflicts that worry you persist.
Luke had daddy issues, which was the plot of episodes IV-VI. The big disappointment here is that Ford did difficult daddy better in Cowboys and Aliens than in this film. Basically a throw away.
Warming is WYSIWYG. What is baked in is more emissions. But it we magically stopped emissions today, warming would stop and slight cooling would begin within a decade or so.
The first facility is supposed to deal with waste from decommissioned plants. California will have a bunch, including Humboldt Bay, where sea level rise will inundated the current storage scheme. California seems like the best place for the first nuclear waste dump.
Slashdot Mirror
The rate of fusion research was set when we figured out we'd run out of uranium and coal around 2100. That was back in the 1970s. The rate is pretty much fixed because the work force has too have PhDs to do the work and you have to have PhD advisors to get more PhDs. Big bottleneck. There are some nonstandard approaches, but the big programs can't be accelerated much.
No, we can't replace coal with nuclear because cooling resouces are already strained with coal. You can go up in efficency with natural gas, but not down with nuclear. Best to limit use of thermal generation going forward.
Offshore wind looks to have a good chance at getting very cheap. The capacity there is overwhelming.
Never. Always a resort to the breeder fantasy.
Existing plants are too expensive to run and are closing. http://insideclimatenews.org/s... Nuclear in not cheap at all.
Has a breeder program. Sounds like a great plan.
RTFA http://thinkprogress.org/clima...
The Proposal is for currently available reactor designs.
Thermal power plant need cooling and nuclear need the most to protect the fuel. Already cooling resouces are limited and will become more so. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
The proposal also runs out of uranium before all the reactors are built. http://slashdot.org/journal/53...
The mobile site has been in infinite loop mode for a while now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
China will ban new coal mines for three years: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/... The US will do the same or more since a federal judge ruled last year that mining permits must consider greenhouse gas emissions.
Rail guns make your suggestion impractical. Nuclear plants can't be defended from intercontinental rail guns. Must use dispersed power source in future if the kinds of conflicts that worry you persist.
http://theconversation.com/jap...
For the amount of power the world uses, the effect a negligible. http://www.digitaltrends.com/c...
Luke had daddy issues, which was the plot of episodes IV-VI. The big disappointment here is that Ford did difficult daddy better in Cowboys and Aliens than in this film. Basically a throw away.
Give numbers you can truss.
No one is asking you to.
Warming is WYSIWYG. What is baked in is more emissions. But it we magically stopped emissions today, warming would stop and slight cooling would begin within a decade or so.
ROFLOL
This is a holding pattern proposal. These won't be permanent storage sites.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.c...
DC, Like Nevada, has no civilian power reactors.
The first facility is supposed to deal with waste from decommissioned plants. California will have a bunch, including Humboldt Bay, where sea level rise will inundated the current storage scheme. California seems like the best place for the first nuclear waste dump.