Old 01-07-14, 12:55 PM
  #23  
turbo1889
Transportation Cyclist
 
turbo1889's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montana U.S.A.
Posts: 1,206

Bikes: Too many to list, some I built myself including the frame. I "do" ~ Human-Only-Pedal-Powered-Cycles, Human-Electric-Hybrid-Cycles, Human-IC-Hybrid-Cycles, and one Human-IC-Electric-3way-Hybrid-Cycle

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
Really? There are so many ways to generate electricity... from solar to wind to nuclear that don't involve dead dinos.
Let's leave the nuclear (unless someone cracks the fusion secret) out of it as much as possible, dead burned dino crud in the air or radioactive poisoning that lasts for millions of years and causes permanent global genetic degradation in all species? If I must choose between the two I'll take the dead dino crud which eventually nature cleans up which is a much shorter eventuality then the millions of years of radioactivity.

I understand that there are some applications where nuclear power is the only thing capable of doing the job, deep space probes being one of them (once you get far enough out beyond the outer planets that solar cells don't work any more) but short of those super critical situations conventional dirty fission nuclear power is way worse then burning dead dino crud.
turbo1889 is offline