BlueIce,I agree we have got to stop burning things, oxidation...

BlueIce,

I agree we have got to stop burning things, oxidation and mass release of effluent gases, should be old hat.

We are smarter than that, but powerful forces, money and politics are driving the direction of this debate, not rational thought backed by faith in human ingenuity.

Prisoners are ingenious, they come up with all sorts of ruses and ingenious gadgets to solve their dilemma of scarcity, but they are still in "prison". Ingenuity didn't stop them getting there either, they chose the easy, not smart path and got caught wanting! Human ingenuity alone will not stop us heading towards a literal "Blade Runner" society.

Nuclear is an "alternative", but so is, feeding New York bankers into a furnace to drive a generator (wouldn't that be nice!), but neither I would agree to being terribly smart. Just easy!

Unfortunately, by choosing nuclear to solve our energy problem, we ARE passing the problem onto the next generation, and the one's after that, and so ad infinitum.

WE are choosing THE problems THEY will have to DEAL with and PAY for. Are they going to be thanking YOU!
Its more likely they will have sorted the energy problem long before they find a way to deal with the rad waste we generate today and tomorrow. There are allsorts of "GOOD" alternatives waiting in the wings, but without much more money and energy being used to pull them in to centre stage, we will continue this nihilistic maintenance of the status quo.

Any one remember the school boy test for CO2, (when passed through lime water (Calcium Hydroxide Ca(OH)2 sat sol) turns it milky (CO2 combines to form insoluble Calcium carbonate aka limestone) which you can filter off and dispose of, build yourself a mountan or two. I was thinking why can't we just bubble the atmosphere through a big tank of lime water, and filter off the now solid, unproblematic CO2, viola..no climate change problem. Well I'm not the only one (as if) to have thought about it. Checking the patent office's I discovered that, a process similar to the one I just outlined, but slightly more sophisticated because it was a catalysed (copper waste i think was used) reaction and more efficient at converting the CO2, has been patented by Shell, (may have been BP!).

Are they just sitting on it, waiting for the right moment (from their profit point of view obviously)!

Do you think the oilers of the world are sitting on any more useful human ingenuity? How about energy efficient water lysis? It may be ingenious but it still isn't very useful if its locked in the patent cupboard!

No, nuclear is no "GOOD" alternative, its just an "alternative", easy, route of least resistance.

Why is it that even the latest greatest safest reactors in operation today, can not get private insurance for "misfortunes". Isn't the insurance industry famous for being able to insure just about anything? Well they won't touch nuclear at any premium! They're actuaries don't have slide rules long enough and the sums get much much too scary, even for the ultimate profit sharks.

I hear des ressie's around, er... a long long way around Chernobyl are still quite reasonably priced! The new "Super Dome" should be a real draw card for the area!

Carbonic seas dissolve Barrier Reef.....no longer can be seen from space....Russian sarcophagus new favorite for space tourist's orbiting eyeballs!!!!

I'm passed caring for myself these days, but I feel sad for my kids and their kids kids because all of my experiences tell me, fewer of the wonders of this planet will be around for them to marvel over. I have no desire to pass on a world where David Attenborough's are extinct ;-)