tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post112229719501422173..comments2024-03-07T02:00:01.582-05:00Comments on NEI Nuclear Notes: From the NEI Clip FileUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-1122342840868639612005-07-25T21:54:00.000-04:002005-07-25T21:54:00.000-04:00>>Nuclear power could provide the electricity via ...>>Nuclear power could provide the electricity via batteries and e80 fuel would probably hold gas prices down until battery technology caught up.<BR/><BR/>e85, sorry.Stewart Petersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05558095937453599908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-1122327364142793432005-07-25T17:36:00.000-04:002005-07-25T17:36:00.000-04:00The only way we're going to see nuclear power take...The only way we're going to see nuclear power take market share from coal is if<BR/>-more coal plants are built to replace the oldest nuclear plants. People might wake up. But then again, they probably won't. Choking on coal dust, they'll probably say to each other, "what, you want a third arm?"<BR/>-there's a legislated phaseout of coal, which is not going to happen.<BR/>-there's a heavy carbon emissions tax, which could be done but won't be.<BR/><BR/>Nuclear power, by itself, will not lower our dependence on foreign oil. We use very little oil to generate electricity--the real problem is cars. Natural gas and coal are not good candidates to replace gasoline for obvious reasons. There are several options.<BR/>-RTGs (nuclear batteries). There is some HLW that cannot be reused in reactors; it would be ideal for nuclear batteries. An RTG plus an electric motor is small enough and powerful enough to replace a compact car's (100 HP) fuel system.<BR/>-Gas-optional hybrids. Nuclear power could provide the electricity via batteries and e80 fuel would probably hold gas prices down until battery technology caught up.<BR/>-Just using all the fossil fuels until we don't have any more fossil fuels and then wondering where all the fossil fuels went, which is probably going to happen.<BR/><BR/>Airplanes are not going to take off vertically or use nuclear reactors. Airplane accidents are rare enough that reactors could be used safely if contained well enough, but the politics of nuclear regulation will not allow it. VTOL, though, poses unnecessary risks to passengers, who do not want to rotate 360 degrees, then flip upside down while spinning some more. It's not going to happen.<BR/>Likewise, there will never be personal aircraft. I might understand jetpacks if used with parachutes and if you live somewhere where congestion is absolutely impossible. Other than that, no flying cars. (BTW, there is an advanced nuclear rocket--direct fusion--that might work for this purpose. The problem would be getting the thrust under 2000 pounds, but the irradiation concerns could be dealt with using some simple geometry that has been used since the 1940s.)<BR/>The current trend (JetBlue for example) in the airline industry is to look at smaller aircraft making more flights, not bigger aircraft making flights between large hubs. This is one of the explanations for the enduring popularity of the 737.<BR/><BR/>China needs nuclear. I think there's very little dispute about that. Their environmental problems, large size, and expanding economy are unique and require nuclear power. This is an almost perfect case; there's no reasonable alternative, environmentally or economically.Stewart Petersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05558095937453599908noreply@blogger.com