Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> writes:

> Randy Yates wrote:
>
>> Nuclear is not a long-term viable solution.
>
> More looks like nuclear is the only viable solution.

Viable? No. Available? Perhaps.

>> We still haven't come
>> anywhere close to a good long-term solution for nuclear waste.
>
> You'd better get used to it.

Or else?

>> What we SHOULD be doing (and should HAVE been doing for 40 years) is
>> channeling more funding into fusion (say, 1/10th the amount we've fed
>> wars in the last 40 years?). Once we crack that nut, no one will ever
>> worry about energy again.
>
> Isn't 60 years of research enough to recognize and acknowledge that
> fusion does not work?

You mean ~$200M / year spread among several universities was supposed to
be enough to really accomplish something?
--
Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
Digital Signal Labs % you still wander the fields of your
mailto://yates@ieee.org % sorrow."
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO