Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Let the informed battles begin (Score 1) 413

by Xenolith (#38166330) Attached to: Climate May Be Less Sensitive To CO2 Than Previously Thought
Aerosols fall out of the atmosphere in a couple/three years. United States and other western nations cleaned up in the 70s into the 80s, so aerosols aren't as much of a problem any more. It is becoming a problem in China and other booming industrial nations with no environmental constraints. Eventually they will get a clue, and clean up their act as well... or their boom will end.
Open Source

+ - SPDX sets new standard for SW license info xchange->

Submitted by StoneLion
StoneLion (662869) writes "Get ready for SPDX! The first version of Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) project is set for release next month. It promises a standard format for license and copyright information that can be included with a project's code. If it catches on, it solves an annoying problem for developers who'd rather code than track licensing legalities."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:The Bad PR is Unfortunate (Score 2) 964

by Xenolith (#35639070) Attached to: Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors
Concerning waste from LFTR -

Waste--In theory, LFTRs would produce far less waste along their entire process chain, from ore extraction to nuclear waste storage, than LWRs. A LFTR power plant would generate 4,000 times less mining waste (solids and liquids of similar character to those in uranium mining) and would generate 1,000 to 10,000 times less nuclear waste than an LWR. Additionally, because LFTR burns all of its nuclear fuel, the majority of the waste products (83%) are safe within 10 years, and the remaining waste products (17%) need to be stored in geological isolation for only about 300 years (compared to 10,000 years or more for LWR waste). Additionally, the LFTR can be used to "burn down" waste from an LWR (nearly the entirety of the United States' nuclear waste stockpile) into the standard waste products of an LFTR, so long-term storage of nuclear waste would no longer be needed.

Decommissioning remove the material unused salt for use at other plants. Some contamination may occur, so either reuse on site. Or worst case, crush building and store for 300 years of decontamination. This contamination would be much lower level compared to what is happening at current plants.

Runaway reactions are impossible with LFTR so no Meltdown/china syndrome. The reactor is underground, so it will be terrorist resistant. If a leak happens the molten mix will quickly solidify and not go anywhere (stay out of the groundwater).

Comment: The Bad PR is Unfortunate (Score 5, Interesting) 964

by Xenolith (#35637288) Attached to: Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors
We have the technology for much safer and nearly unlimited nuclear power. Only hurdle is how to deploy. What I am talking about is TWR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor) and LFTR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor). They "burn" waste from current reactors, can be shut-of nearly instantly, no water cooling, and a smaller footprint and cost. Now we have to overcome this bad publicity provided by the old technology.

Comment: Re:It isn't paranoia if it is real (Score 1) 331

by Xenolith (#29244481) Attached to: Microsoft Holding 'Screw Google' Meetings In DC
A lot of hoping. I use gmail and other google utilities... I am hoping with you. Power usually leads to corruption. So outside forces will have to keep an eye on Google. I haven't had anything incredibly bad happen to me from using MS products... mainly because they knew that someone was keeping an eye on them.

Heisenberg may have been here.

Working...