[at-l] solar vs. nukes

[Bob Cummings <ellen@clinic.net> (Bob Cummings)]

"...Wind and solar do not have the energy density to work unless in the case of
solar you went to orbital production," claims Bryan.

I can't debate wind, though I understand every wind power site, like most
American oil facilities, is subsidized by some government agency.

However, in the northern tier of states, most new homes, especially those in
rural and suburban areas, can garner 30-40 percent of their home heating loads
from passive solar at no extra cost whatsoever. It's simply a matter of logical
design.

The problem with nukes is that the waste product remains deadly for centuries,
some say millenia. Human society has yet to keep any junk buried that long. My
daughter spends an hour or two weekly excavating the home dump used by the
house's inhabitants for the first century after it was built in 1860. So far,
she has only uncovered junk.

Weary