Well shooting them in to space would be ideal IF they could find a clear lane to shoot it through, but since NASA was changed into Muslim outreach, lets just let them shoot it over to the Middle East. Kill two birds with one stone.

:text-offtopic: at least partly

Why not shoot it into the sun?

 

Why bother? Shoot it out of the plane of the ecliptic and it won't ever be seen ever again by anything. Ultimately when the sun goes red giant, it'll get eaten up then.

Well shooting them in to space would be ideal IF they could find a clear lane to shoot it through, but since NASA was changed into Muslim outreach, lets just let them shoot it over to the Middle East. Kill two birds with one stone.

 

 

Good one John.

Good one John.

 

I am sure there is a rationale for destroying the source of fuel we depend on today (without having an alternative), fail!

Here is an interesting video that debates both sides:

have you ever been to central or southern jersey. have you seen the massive, vast open farm lands. hundreds of acres that are already wide open, nearly flat, easily accessible, all with unblocked east-south-west exposure.

Salem county just granted permission for the first solar farm.

One thing i know for sure, the way some people drive here in Jersey ( and everywhere else), I don't ever want to see a nuclear powered car! I would go for nuclear powered charging stations to recharge electric powered vehicles.

One thing i know for sure, the way some people drive here in Jersey ( and everywhere else), I don't ever want to see a nuclear powered car! I would go for nuclear powered charging stations to recharge electric powered vehicles.

 

Charging stations are certainly an option, but that restricts mobility and range (and the wait to charge). Also, the huge number of batteries needed in the car makes it highly inefficient.

 

A mass produced (hence cheap in volume) nuclear powered mini-motor can be built such that it's deactivated (neutered) automatically on impacts. The drive-train is still electric and the motor would be completely separate unit that generates electrical power. Obviously, such a beast doesn't exist yet even in prototype stage, but it's a technology challenge and nothing more.

 

The key thing in all this is being bold, no risk no rewards ...

the only real problem with nuclear energy is cooling and disposal of the used up fuel rods..right now we bury the **** very deep under ground.. :doh:

we need to figure out a better disposal method or a way to use the old stuff..

 

Right now it's piling up at the plants that produce it. After gazillions of dollars Yucca Mt. is going nowhere.

The government has been taking your money for forty years through your electric bill to pay for long term storage, and they have completely dropped the ball.

American nuke plants are designed to create waste for reprocessing, the reprocessing part never caught on and weapons grade stuff was created in government reactors instead.

We can get this technology going, WT* we are Americans right? Who introduced the world to nuclear power?

It's not PC to like nuclear today but unless you get a P.C. that runs on ethanol or paraffin we are going to be screwed in this country if we don't wake people up.

(Whew, sorry)