sci.energy

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:42:19 -0000, "News" wrote:

>"Mauried" wrote in message
>news:@news....
>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:53:48 -0800, Anthony Matonak
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Blattus Slafaly £ ¥ 0/00 :) wrote:
>>>> They should go full steam ahead with nuclear like France. Never mind
>>>> trying to explain it to fucking morons who will never understand
>>>> anything. It's environmentally friendly and there will be a use for the
>>>> waste in the future.
>>>
>>>I guess it helps a lot when the public has absolutely no say
>>>in what is done for (or to) them. You don't have to explain,
>>>excuse or admit anything. :)
>>>
>>>Anthony
>>
>>
>> France is a democracy.
>> The population has been happy to vote for Govts who have a public
>> policy of Nuclear power.
>> I guess this makes them all idiots.
>>
>> Indonesia is just now building its first Nuclear power station.
>> Its also a democracy, and the power station was NOT a political issue
>> at all.,
>> Guess this means that another 270 million people are idiots.
>
>The UK is expanding nuclear generation - 62 million are idiots. 6% of the
>power
>can be generated by River Severn and River Mersey tidal barrages.
>Implementing superinsulation and passive solar in new buildings and
>developments and renovations will reduce energy demand enormously.
>Implement local CoGen (combined heat and power) will again reduce demand
>enormously as waste heat is used. As will good office design to prevent
>cooling in a temperate climate.
>
>There are other better ways of doing it, besides nuclear.
>
Indeed there are, but only if someone will pay for them.
A fantastically clean green way of maki ng energy is not a solution
if no one will pay for it.