Quote:
Originally Posted by kcarscadden
David MacKay, a Professor in the Department of Physics at the University of Cambridge, has produced a book that discusses the prospects for sustainable power generation (sustainable defined as lasting at least 1000 years) - wind, solar, tide, wave, bio, nuclear, fusion, etc. and concludes that the only reasonable choice is nuclear.
There is a review of the book at http://www.boingboing.net/2009/04/09...-energy-w.html.
You can download a pdf of the book from his website at http://www.withouthotair.com/ |
Does the book actually say there's enough plutonium in the ground to provide our power needs for the next 1000 years? Because if it does, that goes against some claims I've heard elsewhere recently (though I'd have to search to remember where). And I'm curious as to why he thinks solar, wind and tides won't be workable long-term, when they will require far less and less intensive maintenance than nuclear...