On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Nuclear fission has a lot of critics, and rightly so ... but all of the
> problems of fission derive from trying to control a multi-ton critical mass
> of explosively enriched U in a steam pressurized reactor. Even with that
> major design problem, the French have demonstrated to the rest of the World
> that fission can make economic sense.
> Even with Fukushima still smoldering, we must consider that an improved
> version of nuclear fission can make great economic sense. This is
> especially true for countries without much oil. When the electric car goes
> into mass production at lower cost (soon) off-peak recharging is a feature
> which makes fission more economically viable in the 'big picture'.
> A "new and improved" version of fission means ditching enrichment, going
> subcritical, going small and modular and with direct conversion of heat to
> electricity. It is easily possible that fission can be made preferable to
> hot fusion in every way, and less costly than any other option including
> coal and cold fusion, if Pd is required.
I hear they're getting energy out of windmills and solar panels too, these