Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/02/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Nuclear power (was RE: LUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 221)
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Thu Feb 2 15:01:53 2006
References: <200602021639.k12Gc75D031645@server1.waverley.reid.org><fededdd5839708ceec 785fb29002969a@shaw.ca><013f01c62821$20f81980$2501a8c0@jblack> <4cfa589b0602021017g3a250731hacc188572ca46674@mail.gmail.com> <015d01c62827$c3d83580$2501a8c0@jblack>

>  > Hmmm - I can't see a plasma furnace as doing anything to the nuclear
>>  properties of the isotopes - creating a plasma means pulling off one
>>  or more electrons to create an excited gas.
><snip>
>
>Not to wax political, but it seems like I remember hearing Al Gore promoting
>this method of waste disposal during or around the 2000 presidential race.
>If you remember what he was talking about, describe the process please...
>
>JB

The big problem is that to change the nuclei into stable forms you 
generally have to provide power in the same order of magnitude that 
you managed to extract for your energy production in the first place.

It's just not feasible, and bringing the whole thing up to plasma 
temperatures just isn't enough, as Adam has pointed out. Shooting the 
stuff into the sun is more efficient, and is, as far as I know, the 
only real solution that anyone has put forward to date. All storage 
solutions on Earth have some problems.

-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com

In reply to: Message from jblack at ambio.net (John Black) ([Leica] Re: Nuclear power (was RE: LUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 221))
Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] Re: Nuclear power (was RE: LUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 221))
Message from jblack at ambio.net (John Black) ([Leica] Re: Nuclear power (was RE: LUG Digest, Vol 31, Issue 221))