Ping... Phil Pugliese (17 Oct 2014 14:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Andrew Long (17 Oct 2014 14:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Richard Aiken (18 Oct 2014 11:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Kelly St. Clair (18 Oct 2014 12:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Andrew Long (18 Oct 2014 16:15 UTC)
Fusion by 2025? Kurt Feltenberger (18 Oct 2014 17:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Kelly St. Clair (18 Oct 2014 17:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (19 Oct 2014 00:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Craig Berry (19 Oct 2014 03:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ian Whitchurch (19 Oct 2014 04:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Craig Berry (19 Oct 2014 04:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Richard Aiken (20 Oct 2014 00:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (20 Oct 2014 02:25 UTC)
RE: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ewan Quibell (20 Oct 2014 09:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (20 Oct 2014 16:46 UTC)
RE: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Anthony Jackson (20 Oct 2014 17:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (21 Oct 2014 21:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (19 Oct 2014 16:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (21 Oct 2014 21:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 21:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (21 Oct 2014 22:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ian Whitchurch (21 Oct 2014 23:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (21 Oct 2014 23:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ian Whitchurch (22 Oct 2014 00:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (22 Oct 2014 07:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Tim (21 Oct 2014 04:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ian Whitchurch (21 Oct 2014 04:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 08:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (21 Oct 2014 16:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 09:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (21 Oct 2014 16:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 17:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (21 Oct 2014 17:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? David Shaw (21 Oct 2014 18:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 18:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 18:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Evyn MacDude (21 Oct 2014 21:02 UTC)
Fringe Politics in the 3I; was Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 21:45 UTC)
RE: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Anthony Jackson (21 Oct 2014 20:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (21 Oct 2014 21:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Evyn MacDude (21 Oct 2014 21:13 UTC)
RE: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Anthony Jackson (21 Oct 2014 21:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Edward Swatschek (22 Oct 2014 05:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Kenneth Barns (22 Oct 2014 07:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Greg Chalik (22 Oct 2014 07:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (22 Oct 2014 17:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (22 Oct 2014 17:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Evyn MacDude (21 Oct 2014 21:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Colin Paddock (23 Oct 2014 01:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (23 Oct 2014 16:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? David Shaw (23 Oct 2014 17:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson (23 Oct 2014 17:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Colin Paddock (05 Nov 2014 22:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (06 Nov 2014 00:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Ian Whitchurch (05 Nov 2014 22:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (06 Nov 2014 00:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Kelly St. Clair (06 Nov 2014 01:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Phil Pugliese (06 Nov 2014 04:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Tim (06 Nov 2014 05:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Phil Pugliese (18 Oct 2014 17:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Richard Aiken (20 Oct 2014 00:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Phil Pugliese (20 Oct 2014 16:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Ping... Kurt Feltenberger (20 Oct 2014 16:57 UTC)

Re: [TML] Fusion by 2025? Bruce Johnson 21 Oct 2014 17:58 UTC

On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:37 AM, Phil Pugliese (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:

>
> I remember hearing Obama's first Sec of Energy talking about how nuke power was necessary as a 'bridge' to a 'Green Future'. When asked about the 'anti-nukes' he said, with a smile, something like "They'll just have to get over it"<sic>
> Well he never got anything going at all & now he's gone, isn't he?

Thayt’s HARDLY due to nukes. He said something as innocuous as “Hey we could save a lot of money on energy bills just by paingin roofs with white paint; we should have a program to do that” and the right wing tore him a new one as some sort of commie leftist tyrant “How DARE you tell us what color to paint our roofs!!!”

(And 99% of them went home to their gated communities covered by CCA’s that tell, them, in no uncertain terms, just exactly what color they’re allowed to paint their roofs.)

Germany dumped their nukes in response to Fukushima, which was not an altogether idiotic thing to do. If a country as allegedly technocratic and competent as Japan could have such a disaster, the people of Germany certainly thought that they no longer wished to have that risk.

YOU may think it’s irrational, but that doesn’t make it so.

Total costs are not calculated in relation to "political prejudices and ideology”. Contracts may be agreed to on a "You tell me what you want & I'll make the numbers support it” basis, but reality has this REALLY annoying habit of ignoring our attempts to override it. I’m sure that mainframe contract turned out, in the end to be the cheapest, right? :-/

--
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs