![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article Jim Logajan writes:
"Jay Honeck" wrote: 3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are lifted. Not needed: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg 2 plants in the country? Good to get started, but We should probably be building 20 - 30 in California alone. However: California law prohibits the construction of any new nuclear power plants in California until the Energy Commission finds that the federal government has approved and there exists a demonstrated technology for the permanent disposal of spent fuel from these facilities. Source: http://www.energy.ca.gov/nuclear/california.html We need to do something about that. We should be recycling this slightly used nuclear fuel, not throwing it away. [ Now, I would suggest that all electrical power to Sacramento (the CA capitol) be shut off until the legislature comes to their senses. ] 4. By decree, hydrogen fuel is now the way of the future -- period. From this point on, by my decree, the scientific and industrial capacity of the United States will be used to perfect a hydrogen distribution system to replace our current gasoline distribution system, and all cars will be powered by hydrogen. Source: http://tinyurl.com/6hklhf Well at least you linked to an article that makes clear that the hydrogen has to be generated from another source of energy. H2 sucks anyway on several counts - and your last decree will essentially ground all small aircraft, including your own. Contrary to your ultimate goal, I assume. Indeed. Hydrogen is a difficult fuel, with fairly low energy density for a givin volume. It is also difficult to handle and transport safely. Currently, the only known way of cramming hydrogen into a small enough volume to be of use in your airplane is, ironically, by _lightly_ binding the H atoms to something like, oh say, carbon. A hydrocarbon. Which makes for a better fuel, safer, and well suited to running our aircraft. All we need to do is extract the carbon from the atmosphere, and I have seen hints that such may be reasonably doable. Alan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My 302 and PDA are no longer on speaking terms | Dixie Sierra | Soaring | 4 | September 10th 07 05:16 PM |
Some IFR GPS's no longer useable | kevmor | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | May 28th 07 02:27 AM |
Jepp no longer in the GA business...? | John Harper | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | June 17th 04 10:49 PM |
Some airmen facing longer deployments | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 16th 04 08:34 PM |