On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:58 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm all for sun and wind, but the storage and transmission issue may be a > lot harder to solve in the short term than building LFTRs. > I agree. > And even building LFTRs will probably take ten years for development. > In today's environment it would take a lot longer than that to build a LFTR, but not for any scientific or technological reason; if there was a consensus that it REALLY needed to get done it could happen mighty quick. It was only in 1939 that we realized nuclear fission was even theoretically possible, and yet by 1945 2 nuclear bombs had destroyed 2 cities; and they achieved fission in 2 completely different ways. A small amount of electricity was first generated by a nuclear reactor in late 1951, and by 1954 we'd figured out how to make such a reactor small enough and powerful enough to power a submarine; today that wouldn't be enough time to even fill out the paperwork requesting a environmental impact study of the project. I don't think the first LFTR will be built in the USA or anywhere in the western world; in China probably. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
