Why don't Climatologists Support Nuclear Power?
I am open-minded but skeptical about human-induced climate change. WDonway's - recent post got me thinking again.
If CO2 is really the culprit, and one really believes it, why then are these same people not clamoring for the only presently viable solution to resolve it, Nuclear Power?
Renewables are clearly too far off, and far too ineffective. If one really believes human-induced global warming is a looming disaster, why are they not pushing to solve it. This seems a simple question to pose to any climate-religious-zealot. I suspect a majority would think for a moment where the funding originates, and decide to take a evasive political stance.
If CO2 is really the culprit, and one really believes it, why then are these same people not clamoring for the only presently viable solution to resolve it, Nuclear Power?
Renewables are clearly too far off, and far too ineffective. If one really believes human-induced global warming is a looming disaster, why are they not pushing to solve it. This seems a simple question to pose to any climate-religious-zealot. I suspect a majority would think for a moment where the funding originates, and decide to take a evasive political stance.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
operators of the "calutrons" at y12 where I worked.
of course, there were more women available for work
during ww2, yet the scientists wanted to operate the
controls of these u235-separating contraptions
themselves. . they used very heavy magnetic fields
to bend the flight of uranium atoms boiled from a
tiny source and collected after their flight through
the magnetic field. . constant adjustment was
needed, as the boiling rate and field strength were
varying all the time.
someone suggested that they ask some of the
available laboratory women to operate the controls.
they did much better than the scientists. . they took
over the job for the rest of the war. . back then, they
were called the calutron girls. -- j
p.s. see the last paragraph in "Scaling Up..." ::: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron
.
we could do nuclear in a snap and thumb our noses
at the OPEC nations, plus many others -- and use
North Dakota oil for our classic cars forever!!! -- j
.
it out for you plebes. . Hide and watch." -- j
p.s. even Christians believe in the "dominion" principle --
decoupling humans from nature is insane.
.
The original Orion project in the late fifties through the early seventies is still a great idea. There is still ongoing argument that NASA had the concept first or the scientists and engineers at General Atomics. The experimentation on using small nuclear explosions against a large ablative pusher plate to propel a large spacecraft into space was a part time project at GA. The actual technology was fully engineered but was halted due to the nuclear test ban treaty. The engineering even worked out to mitigate the radiation from the small nuclear blasts behind the craft. Today, it could be built in the space probably at a lagrange point then thrusted out well away from Earth to start the continuous explosion process. We could be on the way of colonizing the solar system and beyond. In reference to Analog Magazine, a number of years back a well known scifi writer wrote an article that had a design of magnetic field generators to protect the astronauts from cosmic rays.
I remembered this article when we started Schuyler House - I was the chief trainer back then. If I had trouble relating how to work the software, I would try to find some relation to an everyday task. Once, the trainee was so...uh...challenging, that I finally made up a little song, "Three letters of the last name. Comma. Three letters of the first name. Enter...."
If I recall correctly, Kimball Kennison also taught an heiress about space travel in a similar fashion.
The problem is that change is happening so quickly that you can barely find a metaphor before the user interface changes again.
Jan
BTW, I think the organelles' function is more certain than AGW. They're only analogous in that I'm not an expert in either one. In any case, I accept scientific opinion over what I wish were true.
BTW - Ford invented the NiMH battery tech that the original Prius used.
Still think "A=A" is noise.
Any thoughts on how can the ignorant be FM-educated to support the right answers?
There's no denying that. There's millions to be made studying the climate. The trouble is there's tens of trillions of dollars (yes, 10^13) of economic activity associated with burning stuff. This is why people deny reality.
Load more comments...