Nuclear energy is one of the safest forms of energy out there. The main
problem with it is that you never hear about it unless there's a disaster.
Just as a fyi, a coal or natural gas fired powerplant emits more ambient
radiation than a nuclear power plant does.
It just so happens that Chernobyl was the worst accident ever so it sticks
in everyone's mind, and that design isn't used anymore anyway.
-- - Josh Lowered 2000 Dakota CC 3.9L www.geocities.com/lenny187/dakota.html www.omg-stfu.com"Phillip Batson" <pbatson68@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:20040604193950.59008.qmail@web21106.mail.yahoo.com... > > Uh, Chernobyl comes to mind.. :P > > http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chapter1.html > > --- Rick Barnes <barnesrv@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > Why not nuclear? > > > > Rascal > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net > > [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On > > Behalf Of Mr. Plow > > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 12:21 PM > > To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net > > Subject: Re: DML: RE: Hybrids (was: Hybrid Escape) > > > > > > The planet needs to move as whole away from > > dependance on fossil fuels. > > There are a ton of different ways to get power that > > is totally renewable, > > solar, wind, geothermal, they can even put turbines > > in the ocean and produce > > > > power from the naturally occurring currents. > > Not one single source of alternative power is going > > to totally do away with > > our oil needs, but if we take a holistic approach, > > the need for petroleum > > would be drastically reduced. > > > > Big oil is the problem though, if they were smart, > > THEY would be the ones > > developing the new types of power, instead they are > > wasting their money and > > efforts trying to squash all attempts at getting > > away from our oil > > dependance. > > > > > > > > The Adam Blaster > > Two words, figure it out..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Hehe, yup!! read a big series of articles that were > > being wrote in several > > >different places (editorials in car mags (several), > > one or tow of the big > > >mags such as newsweek or time, and quite a few > > online sources) Anyway, they > > > > >all were coming to the same conclusion. It is just > > a smoke and mirror type > > >ploy. The fuel cell is cleaner burning which in > > turn make the consumer > > >happy to have a clean burning car but on the back > > end it uses basically the > > > > >same amount of oil to produce (some figured it was > > more) due to the much > > >higher need for electricity and the process itself > > lends itself to high > > >fossil fuel consumption. They may find ways to > > circumvent that in the long > > >run but any business is going to aggressively try > > to protect their > > >interests (in this case oil companies) so that will > > not be a primary focus > > >i think. Of course coal comes into play more here > > also since it can be used > > > > >for this type of process but in the end all the > > pollutants just come out of > > > > >a factory than a car. Nice idea but the back end > > logistics need to be > > >legitimately brought forth and looked into solving. > > > > > >Jeff Durling > > > > > >BTW, DC announced a few months ago that the hybrid > > durango was dead, not > > >due to it being possible to build, but they felt > > there was a lack of > > >interest. > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > MSN 9 Dial-up Internet Access fights spam and > > pop-ups - now 3 months FREE! > > > http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/ > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 01 2004 - 00:15:16 EDT