Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Consider voting third party (Score 1) 792

I'm not from the US, but part of the "free world" elsewhere. So, I might overlook something important. However, I claim that the bipolarity of the US political system is major contributor to the present political blockade. Where I come from new parties pop up and others vanish all the time. This is not possible in the US.

Just consider our latest addition: the "Pirate Party" (yes, this is the name). They come straight out of the nerd culture and now they are finding out how that culture and its technology can be applied to politics, even in the parliament of a big city-state (Berlin). I am confident that this experiment will have an interesting outcome.

I'm afraid that this is no practical answer to the original question, but I would really like to suggest to put more flexibility into the US political system.


Comment One more thing (Score 1) 394

That's so obvious that it slipped past me: The new coal power plants are not built because of Fukushima. They have been planned long before Fukushima because the management of the companies that planned these power plants believed that they would be economical because they use cheap Australian coal. Planning a power plant takes years.

Comment Re:Gah (Score 2) 394

That's a really dumb remark. Germany has shut down the oldest, most Fukushima-like reactors. They cannot be magically remodelled into fancy new reactors.
From there, there are options:
  • build reactors according to present designs, unsafe, expensive, prabably you would call that dumb, too
  • wait for the next nuclear generation. That's not even dumb if you need power now
  • build fossil power stations. If they use natural gas, that can be sensible
  • develop renewables

From a german point of view the last option is more attractive than from an US point of view, because Germany has lots of experience with renewable energy.

Comment Re:What does it have to do with Japan... (Score 1) 364

You are right. Nuclear plants are not perfect. I'm german, and I support the exit from nuclear. The city where I live is Munich, with 1.3 Mio inhabitants and lots of industry, including BMW, including big BMW production facilities. Our electricity sources will be 100% renewables by 2025.
So, with the exit from nuclear at 2022 (not now, by the way) we will simply implement that as planned. Lots of work, but 11 years is a long time. There will be use of natural gas before we are fully based on renewables, but that will be less than at places where nuclear is still active but efficient use of energy has been forgotten.
I invite you to check back in 2022 and 2025 hand see how we are doing. Gorgonite

Comment Re:They will make a fortune (Score 3, Insightful) 308

Except that reprocessing does not solve the waste disposal problem. You need to dispoese the waste from your reprocessing facility. You may spend lots of money (one billion won't be enough) to solve this too, but then some other problem with show up. Even worse, given the probabilities that we see right now then France is due for a big accident sooner or later. That accident will be a surprise to everyone, this seems to me like the only constant in nuclear energy.

Slashdot Top Deals

Every little picofarad has a nanohenry all its own. -- Don Vonada