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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (47186)	3/9/2004 9:13:54 PM
From: Condor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

the only short term solution* available to significantly reduce the world's growing dependence on fossil fuels is to convert as much as possible to nuclear energy,* I couldn't agree more. C

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (47186)	3/9/2004 10:01:15 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

we may soon see commercial airliners that run on nuclear power Kerry, Is that really you, or did Osama bin Laden steal your SI password? <ggg> You are normally the most serious and sensible person on this board, but your idea of flying nuclear reactors is utterly preposterous. Aside from the technical problems and accident potential, it would conveniently put a dirty nuclear bomb and delivery system within the grasp of suicide terrorists.

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (47186)	3/10/2004 8:42:00 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Kerry, Re: I'll hazard a guess that we may soon see commercial airliners that run on nuclear power. I've seen this solution proposed for space travel by Ted Taylor, who developed a generation of tactical nuclear weapons at Los Alamos. But that system was completely dirty, in that the propulsion was based on a series of explosions behind a thrust shield with the waste radiation simply spread in space. How would an atmospherically confined nuclear engine work?