AW: [ RadSafe ] cost per kilowatt ratio

[Jeff Terry]

Hi Franz,

Thank you for the welcome. I joined the group back in June. I usually  
am more of a lurker than a poster, but I am very familiar with Mr.  
Salsman and his posts.

I don't expect to change Mr. Salsman's mind but I find that engaging  
people with absolute positions like his is beneficial. It keeps my  
arguments sharp. While zealots on both sides, often are unwilling to  
concede a point, many people can be persuaded to change their  
positions when faced with strong supported arguments.

My research is in both nuclear and solar power generation. In some  
regards, I am committed to neither. As I look into the future, I see  
all of the methods of non-fossil fuel power generation needing to  
increase. I don't believe that any of them are perfect from an  
environmental standpoint. I am open to be convinced otherwise though.

 From a practical perspective, I think that nuclear is our best  
option of the next 100 years. Maybe, in a longer time frame fusion,  
solar, or even wind power may win out.

In the solar energy arena, Sandia National Laboratory strongly backs  
the 10000 square mile (26000 square km) solar energy rule of thumb  
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041110163722.htm)

Anyway, over the next 30 years, I expect nuclear with cogeneration of  
hydrogen to solve many of the current energy problems. Although,  
there are a number of materials issues to be worked out. I think this  
is the path on which we find ourselves.

May we live in interesting times and I find our current situations  
quite interesting.


Jeff

On Feb 10, 2007, at 2:16 PM, Franz Schönhofer wrote:

> Jeff,
>
> I do not recall that I read your name before on RADSAFE - welcome  
> to the
> community! Please do not fall from the beginning into the trap of Mr.
> Salsman. He has since months (years?) tried to keep us busy with his
> DU-stories, with queer, nonexisting compounds of DU, "gases" of those
> nonexisting compounds, trying to convince us to accept them as the  
> real
> dangerous compounds causing detriment etc. etc. Any facts put  
> forward by
> RADSAFE subscribers - among them some very well familiar with DU,
> epidemiology, with access to all kind of US and international  
> research -
> have not been able to stop his ever repeated claims.
>
> Obviously some clear messages during the last few days have caused  
> him to
> change suddenly the subject of his ire - now we have suddenly  
> contributions
> about the inefficiency of nuclear power, the great efficiency of wind,
> solar,..... everything without any funded arguments.
>
> I absolutely do not want to disencourage you to answer to his  
> claims, the
> facts you put forward are very intrested and obviously very well  
> researched,
> but I do not believe that you will convince Mr. Salsman - he will  
> always
> find some point of criticism and if it only would be that he will tell
> everybody that you wrote 4.5% and according to his sources it would  
> be only
> 4.4 %.....
>
> Best regards,
>
> Franz
>
>
> Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
> MinRat i.R.
> Habicherg. 31/7
> A-1160 Wien/Vienna
> AUSTRIA
>
>
> -