I thought that TerraPower was interesting because they offer an option for
using the depleted uranium.

On Saturday, April 2, 2016, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:

> Take a look at thorium reactors.  Much less bad waste, no chance of
> meltdown.  The only reason our nuclear energy infrastructure is uranium
> based is that it spun off of nuclear weapon development.  Thorium is more
> abundant too.  Just needs to be developed.
>
> *From:* Jason McKemie
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 02, 2016 12:43 AM
> *To:* [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one?
>
> This company is interesting:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
>
>> And why are you thinking the waste needs to be encapsulated?
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
>>
>> Just reprocess it.  And really it is not that dangerous.   A tanker of
>> chlorine or ammonia is much more dangerous.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Stefan Englhardt <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>> *Sent:* Friday, April 01, 2016 6:56 PM
>> *To:* [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one?
>>
>> Nuclear is very expensive. If you calculate the cost of moving and
>> reencapsulating the waste for some thousand years. Your ancestors will
>> learn that no energy company will exist long enough to take responsibility
>> for the waste they generated. This will be done by the tax payer.
>>
>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
>> Von: Josh Luthman <[email protected]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>>
>> Datum: 01.04.2016 22:18 (GMT+01:00)
>> An: [email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>> Betreff: Re: [AFMUG] Tesla Model 3... who else is getting one?
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to