Soft coal emits Thorium. Hard coal doesn't. It is a matter of filtration.

"Nukes" use skilled and highly trained workers. Lower number of low
level workers.

We had a breeder up and running - in fact more than one. They were
small (relative) demonstration units. Oak Ridge had one. I toured it.

With the breeder up and running the 'spent' fuel could be burned and
with other materials make new fuel. It itself generates power as well.

A movie killed the whole program. Hollywood was run by anti-nuke people
for a while. e.g. 'melt a hole to the center of the earth' "China
Syndrome" etc.

Martin

On 2/27/2011 6:32 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 04:54:52 -0600, wrote:

"Tom Gardner"tg@tg,com wrote:

Let me rephrase. "Of course radicals abhor nuclear power." Why are all the people
that work on nukes liberals? Seems an awful broad statement not grounded in fact but
you injected politics. I admit my bias, do you?

coal companies abhor nukes is a more accurate statement

I still can't believe that liberals have allowed coal companies to
stay in business. I firmly believe that more pollution (CO2 and other
extremely hot gases if nothing else) comes from them than anything
else in the world.

Unions hate nuke, too, because they use far fewer workers.

--
You can't wait for inspiration. You have to go after it with a club.
--Jack London