Not potatoes and gold.
But that's irrelevant.
Perhaps efficiency was the wrong label for how the "best" design undermined "good" design.
If nuclear power had short development cycles and small increments of purchase like the semiconductor market, then it would have sustained its leading technological edge. Instead, massive investment and long lead times ensured everything built was an insult to advanced research.
In the fruition of research as projected by the nuclear industry, fission itself would turn out to be an intermediate kludge.
Seriously? Do you really believe a bunch of hippies put the breaks on something as profitable as Nuclear power?
Coal and oil lobbies, the folks paid to store nuclear waste instead of processing it into new power. Look at those folks. Follow the money. When anything of importance happens it's always money.
Companies like Bechtel, Westinghouse, and GE got special access to governments wherever they wanted, due partly to their oligopoly on big-project experience. Coal plants and refineries didn't damage the "we are the future" mojo of the big contractors who were just biding time.
They were paralyzed by their own analysis of the economics of fission-generated electricity:
1. All the efficiency is in breeder reactors. Nothing else comes close, so don't exclude them from the discussion. All the other options sound like a steam-powered motorcycle.
2. The only problem is that breeder reactors are vulnerable to being weaponized and would inevitably become vectors for the proliferation of fissionable explosives. But killing that research deflated the righteous and greedy zest to shove political decisions on a government -- but only in regard to nuclear energy, and only for the moment.
3. Fusion. Just wait. It's okay, it's not like you can't take take over the world with just oil-field services.
the persecution of scientists
the enforcement of taboos
the "war on drugs" and other states of mind
repression of political opposition to a regime in power
all live by stripping privacy
As for 'why' they should pay for the storage, it's because they're seen as introducing the problem. Nuclear and coal at least operate all the time, and nobody is building another baseload plant that would exceed the demand limit.
By operating a high capacity full-time, "base lead" plants are shoving the problem of variability onto other generators and making the swings much worse for them.
If base load plants are cheaper because their capital costs are spread out over more energy, then they are cheaper only for the investors, not the customers. They do not decrease the net price of electricity. They just make peak-demand usage more expensive.
Link to Original Source
This same line -- shifting the discussion to the long legal process -- was identical in the prelude to savaging Federal Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson and overturning years of defeat in their trial for anticompetitive practices.
Microsoft won't accede to the power of the law. That's all. It has nothing to do with Microsoft's policy toward customers, though they'll say anything.
correct spelling: damned Sirial murderers
Henry George looked from a high hill toward the growing San Franscisco in the 1870's and realized that rising land prices were a bug in in the industrial economy. They punished success.
His book sold more copies than any other in the 19th century in the United States: Progress and Poverty.
An excellent characterization.
As I understand it, he was arrested for complaining that the war was not going well, which everyone knew but people in high places were forbidden to mention. His problem wasn't that the Nazis were Nazis, but that they were the losing.
As a technocrat under extenuating circumstances, he illustrates the worst moral worthlessness to which a technocrat can fall, and so should not be esteemed. He should never have been celebrated as an American hero.
The kindest thing you can say about him was that he had tunnel vision. He was an ambitious man who did not find murderous slavery to be sufficient reason to just take orders. No one can be forced to lead as uniquely as von Braun or forced to fight so hard for control of a project.
Was his behavior understandable? Yes, if you believe he was blinded by obsession. Was it justified? Not by a moon shot.
From the article:
"The actual manufacturing was done by prisoners from the concentration camp Mittelbau-Dora. As the historian Michael J. Neufeld has documented, von Braun went so far as to handpick detainees with technical qualifications for this work. (The prisoners were worked literally to death. In all, about 12,000 died producing von Braun’s rockets; for comparison, the rockets themselves would kill an estimated 9,000 people, many of them civilians.)"
I'm not against trucks. I just think that trains that can carry 600 people downtown to downtown at 300 kph shouldn't be something citizens of the United States can experience only overseas.
P.S. If I wanted to hide, I'd head to the old farm. It's pretty hard to hide in a subway.
The Nordic report cited above indicates that deterioration from environmental effects is not significant. Doesn't sound right, but then none of this matches intuition.
Speculation based on cursory reading: Since trucks do their worst where pavement is rough, the freeze-thaw cycle doesn't get a chance to do its worst because the trucks are too quick at expanding fissures and pounding the edges of cracks. Once trucks start tearing up a roadway, the destruction accelerates because tires bang asphalt at all angles and concentrate their load on a smaller area with shuddering stress.
We are sympathetic to your point of view, Citizen, but the approach you advocate would delay the expansion of government control over your life. We trust you are not hostile to the radiant future where cars have more autonomy than you do.