Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:18:30 AM
@danagamer, as a conservative myself, please know we are all for alternatives, as long as they make reasonable and economic sense to pursue. I am not a fan of spending endless tax dollars on research. Why? Because ever since I was in grade school in the 1970's they`ve been wasting money on the next big thing that will solve all the worlds problems. All we`ve done is hurt people financially in the process and here I am four decades later and there`s little to show for it. That said, if IBM or whoever wants to pursue this then have at it! Good for you! Come up with ways to solve many of the problems other commenters have stated here. Just stop needlessly hurting people in the process!
Wednesday, February 26, 2014 7:31:50 AM
"It would take only 2% of the Sahara Desert's land (not sea?) area to produce all the world`s electricity needs." And one determined Al-Qaeda gang with a big bomb to cut off all the world`s electricity.
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 6:16:43 PM
Well, as long as it made Germany feel better about itself, I guess.
It was politically useful, which was of course the point. Lots of votes in "green" issues in Germany, even if it isn't really green. As long as the pollution is somewhere else, it`s politically useful.
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 6:14:45 PM
I wonder why people are so fascinated by solar power. It's unreliable and high maintenance.
Tidal and/or wave power has so much potential.
Solar has a lot of potential because it`s all over the place. It`s nowhere near practical and might never be, but it does have potential. Tidal and wave has more potential in some places, but not all. Neither actually works yet, though. Not for a national grid.
[quote]So does LFTR technology.[/quote]
True, but fusion has more. LFTR could probably be implemented before fusion, but not by more than a few decades at most. It might be a better idea to use existing fission until fusion is viable.