Re: [Amc-list] Water Powered Engine now slightly OT, now even more off-topic.....

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

As for waste, I read recently that is another one of our gov'ments F'ups
They decided that waste could not be re-refined to capture the leftover uranium and other goodies as that could be used to make bombs. So they banned it, I believe this is some international pact.
>From what I read recently a large amount of the "waste" can be recycled, greatly reducing the quantity of waste, but we aren't allowed. To top it off, if we refined it we could draw in the leftover wast from other countries that are re-refining it to make bomb grade goodies.
   Seems silly, not allowed to refine radioctive waste because it can make bombs or whatever.
gee it could be used for that purpose the first time around too, couldn't it?

  

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrc II
" Chronic Pain Hurts"

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Joe Fulton <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> --- Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Solar/wind/nuclear electric beats it all 100 times
> > over, yet that would 
> > upset the oil industries (solar/wind) and the rest
> > of us politically 
> > (nuclear).
> 
> Well, it's not the nuclear reactors that make people
> nervous really, it's the nuclear waste created,
> transported and stored.  Perhaps Las Vegas could be
> transplanted to someplace like Atlantic City and the
> whole state of Nevada could be used for nuclear waste
> storage.  Call it environmental triage.
> 
> > 
> > Don't overlook that the spectacularly performing
> > semiconductor industry 
> > (transistors... ICs... computers in phones...) have
> > brought solar cell 
> > tech to nearly 30% efficiency routinely -- it goes
> > up about 2% a year 
> > now -- they're way past the point of 
> > cost-effectiveness for mass 
> > deployment. There's no will for it though.
> 
> Passive solar is gaining/will gain popularity rapidly.
>  The company I work for has a proposal on the table
> for installation of a passive solar collection system
> using today's technology which will reduce our power
> demand by about 80 percent and have a five to eight
> year payback.  Those economics make sense right now,
> at PRESENT utility rates.  No inflation of utility
> rates was invorporated into the proposal.
> 
> Joe Fulton
> Salinas, CA
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list