Yes, it boils down to what CharlesH notes, I think. Amazing no one brought up economics. I thought the discussion on materials for high temperature were interesting all the way around.
The interesting admission by the social-reactionary "Ender" is that "LFTR and mass-molten salt storage for renewables is 'vaporware'. So...basically, they are both vapor ware so why should we choose renewables again????
I think Ender exposes the very reactionary nature of this green percscription: "a DC radio, a lantern"...etc. P O V E R T Y
I was very encouraged by te whole4 discussion. The nuclear opponents were not nearly so setin their opposition asw they were in the past. The seemed more willing to listen.
CharlesB,
ReplyDeleteGreat post. And great comments. You are doing a great job of educating the masses.
The negative comments boil down to
a) we don't want any cheap energy, just encourages more people/development
b) wind/solar, storage, massive grid, ... can do it all
c) it's not here yet (so don't invest so it will be here in 10yrs)
charlesH
Yes, it boils down to what CharlesH notes, I think. Amazing no one brought up economics. I thought the discussion on materials for high temperature were interesting all the way around.
ReplyDeleteThe interesting admission by the social-reactionary "Ender" is that "LFTR and mass-molten salt storage for renewables is 'vaporware'. So...basically, they are both vapor ware so why should we choose renewables again????
I think Ender exposes the very reactionary nature of this green percscription: "a DC radio, a lantern"...etc. P O V E R T Y
David
In the end Enders agrees we should build LFTR. So I think we are making progress.
ReplyDeletecharlesH
I was very encouraged by te whole4 discussion. The nuclear opponents were not nearly so setin their opposition asw they were in the past. The seemed more willing to listen.
ReplyDelete