| LA Blackout |
by VivianC |
2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
| LA goes dark. That is Los Angeles, not Louisiana. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
power was back on | by niwikki | 2005-09-12 13:35:08 |
|
Are you on Edison? | by mortaine | 2005-09-12 14:14:09 |
|
Nope. | by niwikki | 2005-09-12 14:30:58 |
|
...mostly. ;) (n/t) | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:26:45 |
|
A non-biased question | by Kickstart | 2005-09-12 13:41:03 |
|
In California's case | by DesertRat66 | 2005-09-12 13:45:03 |
|
So volunteer your background | by SnappingTurtle | 2005-09-12 14:11:52 |
|
I don't know for sure | by altordwm | 2005-09-12 14:25:09 |
|
He doesn't live in CA. | by JPaganel | 2005-09-12 16:53:52 |
|
Can't give a non-biased answer. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 13:59:00 |
|
What's needed is a *new* energy producer. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:04:39 |
|
The cost of entry is very high. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:07:55 |
|
Uh, why reactors? | by mortaine | 2005-09-12 14:12:51 |
|
Plus, reactor fuel has doubled in cost | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:16:44 |
|
It earned itself back over 10 years. | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:20:31 |
|
Reactors ARE safe, cheap and environmentally sound | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 14:17:01 |
|
Storage isn't a problem. In 40-50 years | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:18:22 |
|
Chernobyl, Three Mile Island | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:19:38 |
|
Chernobyl and Three Mile Island | by Pic | 2005-09-12 14:21:50 |
|
There's no real way of telling that | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:23:15 |
|
Chernobyl was human error. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:26:17 |
|
They did? I'd say "Darwin Award", but unfortunatel | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:27:45 |
|
Not entirely | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:30:02 |
|
RetiQlum2's found links regarding Chernobyl. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:34:36 |
|
See here | by Arachnid | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Chernobyl failed because... | by RetiQlum2 | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Not really, | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:00:16 |
|
Windscale... | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Huh, I'd never heard of that one. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:04:06 |
|
It since got renamed to Sellafield. | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Or | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
TMI was a non-event | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:05:35 |
|
NIMBY applies to wind power, too. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:19:46 |
|
Solar? | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:25:28 |
|
Up here of course there's no way. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:38:58 |
|
Solar B&B | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:02:41 |
|
Every power source has its drawbacks | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 14:55:19 |
|
Hydro dams. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:56:51 |
|
Drawback | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:04:26 |
|
That's true, however | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:07:14 |
|
well, ecept for the clyde village anyway | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:19:58 |
|
James Bay hydroelectric project in Quebec | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 15:10:16 |
|
Just ask the residents of the Grand Canyon | by altordwm | 2005-09-12 15:06:27 |
|
Cost, Build time, Worker deaths, breaches, | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 15:08:08 |
|
Beleive me, the random ground shaking here is | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:21:58 |
|
They cause the destruction of the river ecology. | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 16:35:32 |
|
Entry cost is prohibitively high. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:14:26 |
|
The UF Power Plant | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:21:40 |
|
If your *cooling towers* are glowing, | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:28:17 |
|
Let me guess... | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:28:52 |
|
Oh no, quite the opposite. ;) (n/t) | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 16:15:06 |
|
The secret to wealth in this country has been... | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:09:21 |
|
I think that is a pretty non-biased answer (n/t) | by evilsysadmin | 2005-09-12 14:08:48 |
|
You mean a president in his second term? | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:15:17 |
|
Yes, but... | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:20:24 |
|
Leeches, too. Or annelids, as Illiad says | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:23:14 |
|
I read recently | by spiffikins | 2005-09-12 14:30:53 |
|
I've heard the same thing. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:44:46 |
|
Well, how about a non-biased suggestion from the o | by mortaine | 2005-09-12 14:10:04 |
|
Yes but... | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:17:22 |
|
Luckily, electricity travels near the spd of light (n/t) | by Kickstart | 2005-09-12 14:25:28 |
|
Through wires that can break. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:26:46 |
|
but it looses an incredible amount of energy... | by emtieswall | 2005-09-12 14:34:21 |
|
Small solar plants are prohibitively expensive... | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 14:23:04 |
|
mmmmmm . . . solar pants. (n/t) | by hadji | 2005-09-12 14:36:20 |
|
Way out there :-) | by MatthewDBA | 2005-09-12 14:46:44 |
|
Why polar orbit? (n/t) | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:51:10 |
|
Less down time | by MatthewDBA | 2005-09-12 14:53:43 |
|
You can't put a satellite into geostationary polar | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:55:19 |
|
Polar requires tracking the beam. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 15:00:52 |
|
DISASTER! Microwave beam misaligned! | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:26:13 |
|
It's both a power, and a weapons system! (n/t) | by raptor_87 | 2005-09-12 16:27:36 |
|
why no L3/L4? | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:30:07 |
|
Here's a brilliant idea for an energy source! | by Esteis | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
caused by solar flare activity? | by Danu | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Nope, just dummies. | by VivianC | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Oops. That's not going to look good on the resume. (n/t) | by Danu | 2005-09-12 15:47:08 |