I actually like the concept a lot. But I agree that there is some potential for fallout here:

Having a replacement for Fukushima is one thing, but a world of these going wrong could be a real problem. A majority of the world's oxygen comes from phytoplankton in the ocean: killing them in mass via radioactive leaks might actually create a credible climate disaster.

Not likely that all of the world's reactors would start spilling simultaneously, but the only thing about this that gives me pause. Otherwise, this is a really great idea.

Sounds like NASA finally discovered Maxwell's Demon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

And my point (in reference to the link concluding with Richard Alley's decision to disregard previous non-anthropogenic-global-warming) is the regardless of man's current contribution "weather" may completely dwarf mankind's efforts or effects either way.

If they are justifying their claims on the basis that fixing the leaks will stop future tsunamis, I cannot take their photos or their consensus seriously.

There is climate change due to larger natural forces that, so far, we are all helpless against: it's called weather.

By all means, be responsible for what's in front of you and actually possible to address!

However, I will remain skeptical of the plumber who comes knocking on my door claiming I have leaky pipes and purchasing his services is the only way to stop the next tsunami.

Yeah, I just read their security advisory. I was basing my information on the original Heartbleed slashdot article which listed OpenBSD as unaffected.

(Note to self: Verify all thy claims before making a near-first comment on slashdot...)

Obviously since OpenBSD is running their fork of OpenSSL 0.9.8 which essentially doesn't have this exploit, this is just a shameless plug.

But having an OpenBSD vetted OpenSSL 1.0.1g+ for Ubuntu, now that would be something!

This is analogous to a flooded bathroom in a Fukushima apartment sometime after lunch April 7th, 2011. Cleaning up the mess in your bathroom may help your quality of life for a few hours, but its essentially going to do nothing about the tsunami outside.

Sure, you're responsible for the mess you made on the floor. But cleaning that up isn't going to overcome larger natural forces. For that, you're going to need a bigger mop.

I find the article's conclusion in the form of the quote from Richard Alley illogical, wherein he states that warming may or may not have happened in the past, but we need to cleanup our own current contribution.

This is illogical, because a natural course may induce warming far more significant than anything our modern output may have. Richard's conclusion that we must address our contribution completely ignores the possibility that this will do anything to alleviate the impact or magnitude of natural events.

I'm referring to the article's quote of Richard Alley:

Alley is obviously concerned about our modern contribution to global warming, and discounts dwelling on historical warming as not engaging the problem. However this assumes that dealing with man's modern contribution to warming will somehow alleviate nature's own course, which it won't.

What I find interesting is the conclusion of your linked article which mentions that it has been much warmer in the past, but restates the supposed dangers of AGW.

The article's conclusion is illogical.

Given the occurrences of much warmer periods in the past (no matter how catastrophic such warming might be to the billions of people now on the planet) there is no technological basis upon which to expect mankind now posses the capability to stop such warmer temperatures from occurring.

Doubtless carbon fuel combustion is a contributing factor to climate change. Whether industrial sources have any comparison to natural events (forest fires, volcanoes) is more the question.

The release of carbon/methane into the atmosphere has been occurring naturally and violently for a very long time.

In my opinion, we need more carbon in the air to support the food supply; the slow introduction of more carbon into the atmosphere is a good thing.