Lee Michaels wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote

The problem is that trash isn't consistent and contains many
components that don't burn. There's no way that a trash-fueled
plant
will _ever_ be cost competitive with a conventional plant.

And trash contains many toxic elements as well. I read of one
proposal that would burn so hot, that little toxicity would remain.
The catch?? It would require a lot of fuel to burn up the toxic
components. Which may be a way to to take care of toxins, but a
lousy way to generate power.

Yup.

And meanwhile, is the government doing anything about junk mail?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)