On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:21:30 -0800 (PST), the infamous Robatoy
scrawled the following:

On Feb 12, 10:36*pm, "Leon" wrote:
"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message

news:120220102125468331%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderst one.ca...

In article , Lew Hodgett
wrote:

Regardless of your personal opinion of the man, he has a idea worthy
of exploration.

http://tinyurl.com/yaa4yeh

""You'd be stunned at the ridiculously low costs of innovation," said
Gates, who received a standing ovation for his remarks."

If he'd actually innovated ANYTHING after Excel for Mac in the 1980's,
I might have some respect for the weasel.

But he didn't, and I don't.

Jealous?

Celine Dion is one of the richest performers in the world, and she
can't sing.

Other dogs that don't hunt: Thompson's WaterSeal, Minwhacked finishes,
Maytag products, Crapsman products, Wagner sprayers.

They simply have "better" advertising.

--
It's a great life...once you weaken.
--author James Hogan

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:03:48 GMT, the infamous
(Derek Lyons) scrawled the following:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Regardless of your personal opinion of the man, he has a idea worthy
of exploration.

http://tinyurl.com/yaa4yeh

It's kinda like he said "look at all the wheat we have, let's figure
out how to make bread out of it".

Oh, wait, we *already* know how to do that.

Yes, but since raw ore transformed into fuel is a few dollars cheaper
than reprocessing, it is being used instead of reprocessing. We'd have
a lot less high-level waste if we reprocessed, as most of the world is
doing.

--
It's a great life...once you weaken.
--author James Hogan

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:44:16 -0800 (PST), the infamous Robatoy
scrawled the following:

On Feb 13, 12:19*pm, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 2/13/2010 10:50 AM, Robatoy wrote:

If some guy invented a free source of energy which would put the oil
companies out of business, he'd be dead, branded a kook, get bought,
jailed on a trumped up charge, shipped to Gitmo...that is IF the oil
companies had some clout in congress.

Silly, it's common knowledge that you can't get energy for free...

:-D

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USAhttp://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Sooo, "O Wise One™" what is helping to keep my shop all nice and
toasty? Huh? Huh?

G

5 grand worth of imported (from DeSoto, Iowa) solar panels, maybe?


--
It's a great life...once you weaken.
--author James Hogan

On 2/15/2010 2:21 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:44:16 -0800 (PST), the infamous Robatoy
scrawled the following:

Sooo, "O Wise One™" what is helping to keep my shop all nice and
toasty? Huh? Huh?

G

5 grand worth of imported (from DeSoto, Iowa) solar panels, maybe?

Don't I wish! Reduce that by half - twice - to get in the ballpark.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Feb 15, 3:21*pm, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:44:16 -0800 (PST), the infamous Robatoy
scrawled the following:





On Feb 13, 12:19*pm, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 2/13/2010 10:50 AM, Robatoy wrote:

If some guy invented a free source of energy which would put the oil
companies out of business, he'd be dead, branded a kook, get bought,
jailed on a trumped up charge, shipped to Gitmo...that is IF the oil
companies had some clout in congress.

Silly, it's common knowledge that you can't get energy for free...

:-D

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USAhttp://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Sooo, "O Wise One™" what is helping to keep my shop all nice and
toasty? Huh? Huh?

G

5 grand worth of imported (from DeSoto, Iowa) solar panels, maybe?

--
It's a great life...once you weaken.
* * * * * * * --author James Hogan

Naa.. just swapped him for some metal.

Larry Jaques wrote:
....

Yes, but since raw ore transformed into fuel is a few dollars cheaper
than reprocessing, it is being used instead of reprocessing. We'd have
a lot less high-level waste if we reprocessed, as most of the world is
doing.
....

Actually, there's very little commercial nuclear fuel being reprocessed
anywhere at the moment anywhere in the world not just the US.

The difference is it is virtually all economics elsewhere while it's the
remnants of the Carter edict against it in the US (although it's highly
likely it would have followed the path of the rest of the world as not
continuing even if started owing to economics here as well).

There really wouldn't be any significant less HLW except in that it
might consume less physical volume as most of the highly radioactive
components are the byproducts not the retrieved fuel.

The prime reason against it any time _real_soon_now_ is the volume of
HEU available to be blended down from the agreement w/ Russia on
dismantling a sizable fraction of their warheads and returning the HEU
to the US as LEU. With the stagnant demand for commercial fuel over the
last 40 years owing to no growth in installed capacity and this already
processed material there's actually considerable disincentive to
reprocess spent fuel at the present.

One use that's never been made use of in any extent is the spent fuel
waste heat that is fairly significant for a while after discharge. Like
other sources of lower-grade energy, it's never been sufficiently
cost-effective to bother with even though there may be as much as 10% of
full power output in a spent fuel bundle at discharge which for a
typical PWR would be about 500 kW/bundle initially. If had a
third-reactor discharge per fuel cycle that would be somewhere in the
neighborhood of 80 MWt. That could be quite a lot of process or space
heating.

--

On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:40:58 -0600, the infamous Morris Dovey
scrawled the following:

On 2/15/2010 2:21 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:44:16 -0800 (PST), the infamous Robatoy
scrawled the following:

Sooo, "O Wise One™" what is helping to keep my shop all nice and
toasty? Huh? Huh?

G

5 grand worth of imported (from DeSoto, Iowa) solar panels, maybe?

Don't I wish! Reduce that by half - twice - to get in the ballpark.

Oh, I thought you had to have mass quantities of solar in the
blizzardy GWN.

--
It's a great life...once you weaken.
--author James Hogan

On 2/15/2010 11:31 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:

Oh, I thought you had to have mass quantities of solar in the
blizzardy GWN.

Not until you begin to approach either the Arctic or Antarctic Circle.
In the Temperate Zones there's a trade-off between insulation and solar
panel area. Simply put: heat that you don't lose doesn't need to be
replaced.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/