On Monday 06 August 2001 07:20 pm, you wrote: > These things are not nearly as dangerous to the environment. For one > thing, they are solid speres and there is no liquid waste. Thus, they > could be buried, worst case would be in cement or steel slabs. I am sure > there are some logistics involved, but it is not anywhere near as much of a > problem as current reactor waste, as there is heavy water generated in > these reactors which must be stored. My whole point with the wind energy debacle, you don't need to bury a turbine or encase it in cement for the next 10,000 years after its life expentancy. I feel that it doesn't matter wether it is liquid waste, or solid waste, rods vs spheres, you're still just making steam to turn a turbine. Comparative cost of producing wind turbines vs cost of manufacture, transport, utilize, recycle (into what?) and dispose safely for the next few millenia, uranium or a derivative, wind is cheaper.