On 9/4/12 3:46 PM, "Vincent Diepeveen" <d...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > >Uranium is dirt cheap as well, and i don't refer to mox fuel then, >yet to the actual >uranium you (not me of course) can dig up so easily in say Australia >or Syria; >dirt cheap if we look at what a central needs a year versus central >construction costs.
>From what I understand, depleted uranium (from which the 235 has been removed) is essentially available for the transportation costs, as long as you're willing to take "car-load" lots. (granted, transporting tons of anything isn't free) Uranium is actually one of the more common elements. There are whole mountains of Carnotite (potassium uranium vanadate) in the Southwestern US. > >The argument of helium being very cheap was also raised in an >interview with several of the collider guys >put in front of a camera, i must apologize i can't remember whether >it was discovery channel or national geographic. I think the concern in the nuclear biz is more with He3, which has many useful properties, in particular, being useful for Neutron detection and the like. > _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
