alt.energy.renewable

"T. Keating" wrote
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:28:55 -0800 (PST), nada
> wrote:
>
>>Yes, it's basically irrelevant. In fact, many of us in the pro-nuclear
>>blog area are in favor of *higher* prices so there is more exploration
>>and prospecting. But...we should, for a variety of reasons, switch to
>>thorium, there is just so much of it and can easily breed it out to
>>30,000 years worth. There is enough thorium *already mined* to power
>>the entire US electircal grid for 3,000 of those years.
>
> It will take centuries for one to build and breed enough U-233 to
> sustain the non-breeding reactors..
>
> First you need to build the first one.. then the second,

Wow. I was never aware that you can only ever build 1 thing at a time...

>.then
> several hundred, perhaps a thousand of them operating continuously.
> All in the 3GWt range, just to get near self sustaining. @%20 of
> world demand.

Okay.

Karl Johanson