The best energy source is one that supplies energy to the most efficient forms of resistance, energy storage, and transformation devices that humanity should be scrambling to develop.
Andrew Yost PhD Oregon --- Robert Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While there is a risk to nuclear paower, there is a > risk associated with all methods of power > generation. One thing that goads me a little, living > in Mississippi, is the hypocracy of people in say > California, who really get their backs up at the > thought of any sort of power plant being built > there, but then are the most obscene users of power > in the world! To satiate themselves, they hog the > power we produce (the risk is on us!), forcing up > the price and limiting the availability of the power > we produce here to the poorest people in our state, > who just happen to include some of the poorest > people in the US! We provbaly do have people who > work as janitors in TVA facilities, or in the > nuclear plant having to greratly curtail their use > of power because of the actions of hypocrits in > California! Be nice to see these power hogs assume > the risk involved in their lifestyle! ...a bit of a > rant, but it is one of the things you run into with > this issue. > > Nuclear power is a good option because it can be > stored (as fuel) transported as fuel and produced > when needed. Some other options, like solar and wind > power, cannot be readily stored or transported. > Being able to produce at times of peak demand, and > then scale back when demand slackens is an important > aspect of power supply. Fossil fuels are a lot > messier, although they can be transported and > stored. > > "So easy it seemed once found, which yet > unfound most would have thought impossible" > > John Milton > ________________________________________ > > Robert G. Hamilton > Department of Biological Sciences > Mississippi College > P.O. Box 4045 > 200 South Capitol Street > Clinton, MS 39058 > Phone: (601) 925-3872 > FAX (601) 925-3978 > > >>> Leslie Mertz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2/9/2006 9:32 AM > >>> > > > > I'm curious as to how well the answers posted are > matching what > > Leslie is > > hoping to get as an answer... Perhaps she left it > broad to see the > > wide > > variety of responses she may get, or perhaps > she'll need to refine her > > question more... > > I did want to leave it broad. Here's the background: > The question > came up after a discussion about the immediate need > to do something > about global warming, yet still provide energy for > the masses. A few > folks, including Jared Diamond, say that > environmentalists should now > embrace nuclear energy as it weans us off fossil > fuels. Others > believe nuclear is not the way to go, but even here > there is > disagreement: Some say shut down all the plants and > others say we > should keep what we have but not open any new > plants. The discussion > morphed from one on the advantages/disadvantages of > nuclear energy to > one on viable options, especially in developing > nations that are > experiencing drastic population growth and, often > changing lifestyles > that are becoming more energy-demanding. > > Leslie > > ============================ > Leslie Mertz, Ph.D. > educator, science writer/author > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > This message has been scanned by GWGuardian > on GWGuardian.mc.edu and found to be virus free. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
