View Single Post
Old 08-15-06, 10:04 PM
  #11  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by lyeinyoureye
@roody
A mole of urnanium has ~10,000 times more energy than a mole of fossil fuel. Electric vehicles are more efficient than fossil fuel vehicles. We have vast amounts of energy with or without fossil fuels. A nuclear baseload with distributed renewables can provide much more energy than we get from fossil fuels, in a much safer manner. We are not looking at oil fed profits, those who own oil are. They're not going to let it get to the point where civilization disintigrates, but they will squeeze us for as much as they can. God bless facism.

If anyone needs clarification, hit me up
.
I would like clarification of three points, please:
1. How many nuclear plants will we need to replace fossil fuels?

2. How many years will it take to get these plants on line. Please consider the social and political opposition to nuclear power, as well as economic and technical considerations.

3. What will the climate be like by the time fossil fuel combustion is phased out in favor of nuclear power?
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline