Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David R who wrote (240992)	3/22/2002 5:15:12 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Dave, I spent a lot time looking at the pros and the cons. It's a simple issues of numbers to solve the required complexities. When we have 200 million engineers all 100 times as smart as the engineers we have today. Alternatives to nuclear power may be simple enough to solve. But with todays technology, nothing comes close to Nuclear Power as cost effective and safe and non polluting. Every study I've read poo pooing Nuclear Power use unrealistic proffers to make their point. That's my informed opinion. watman.com I've taken the time to gather information. I've read a lot on the links I posted and many other links. One can always find more and more of whatever opinion on the internet. I don't bother much as nothing has changed in technology that changes anything. I've seen no new disruptive technology. The issues driving energy production are technology, cost and the amount of pollution generated. But the solution has to be 24x7 capacity. And that is what drives the steady state costs. If you can't think in terms of redundant and redundant and redundant redundant then you cannot appreciate the value of simplicity and that is the value of Nuclear Power. tom watson tosiwmee