Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

It should be noted that with the emergence of PHEV, the emission sources will shift from millions of individual vehicles to a few hundred central generation facilities. The economics for emission reduction and carbon sequestration technologies may look much more attractive when installed at central power plants rather than in motor vehicles, especially when the costs are spread over longer operating periods and billions of additional kilowatt hours.

I'm sorry, I should have known from reading some of your previous posts that you don't like to do your own research. I should have realized that you already have fully formed opinions on certain matters and refuse to research anything that may refute those previously held opinions. Well, I'm doing you a favor and providing the government sources you asked for.

Here is the study that was completed by the Department of Energy (notice the .gov in the URL, specifying a government entity), specifically the by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. It was released on or near December 11th 2006. It's a 39 page document so I doubt you'll take any time to read it. Let me extract some points for you.

http://www.pnl.gov/energy/eed/etd/pdfs/phev_feasibility_analysis_combined.pdf

...................................................

Incredible as it may seem to those rightly concerned about shielding and the consequences of a crash, the USAF did indeed attempt to build a nuclear powered aircraft, back in the late 1950s. The prototype plant still exists at the DoE Idaho National Laboratory near Arco - a fenced off mausoleum. The reactor was of a very primitive design, due in part to weight considerations and it provided for manual operation of the control rods. An operator error (fatal to the operator in question) yielded a "prompt criticality" accident that in effect turned the facility momentarily into a high energy microwave oven. The project was quickly abandoned.

Interestingly on a ship the combined weight (and volume) of an oil-fired steam plant and its fuel, is a good deal greater than that of a reactor plant and its shielding. Even a thirty year old Nimitz class carrier has more than twice the aviation fuel and ammunition storage capacity of a conventionally-powered carrier of the same size and displacement. Modern Naval reactors use highly enriched fuel; are loaded with boron and other neutron-absorbing "poisions" to limit reactivity early in plant life; have very high power densities; and don't need refuelling for the life of the ship.

Btw, I knew there had been an accident with the nuclear-powered airplane prototype, and that it killed the pilot, but I hope you'll take a sec to walk me through the steps involved: presumably testing in a wind tunnel, he pulled out the rods? How could that produce radiation in the microwave range, or did you mean that as a figure of speech?

Depends. Per capita we have them beat by miles.

It is global cooling, not warming, that is the major climate threat to the world, especially Canada. As a country at the northern limit to agriculture in the world, it would take very little cooling to destroy much of our food crops,

"The big killer" (cardiovascular disease) is the most frequent cause of death in Europe and the USA. In the last fifty years great changes in diet have led to rapid acceleration of the disease. In Europe and the USA many people die at ages as early as 40-50 of thrombosis. In the USA half a million people a year contact thrombosis and die of it. A further million are permanently disabled by thrombosis. A billion dollars a year are spent on medicine for atherosclerosis and thrombosis.

Atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries) begins in childhood. Post-mortems on American soldiers who died in Korean War showed that there were already clear indications of atherosclerosis in twenty-year-olds.

In Greenland atherosclerosis is a more or less unknown disease. For example, in the 1970s there was not a single death due to cardiovascular disease in the hunting district of Uummannaq with about 3,000 inhabitants. In recent years some Greenlanders have moved to Denmark. Following the same pattern as elsewhere in the world, these immigrants have contracted the same cardiovascular diseases as the Danes. So the very low incidence of cardiovascular disease in Greenland cannot be explained by hereditary immunity. In other words, something in the environment has given the Inuit protection against "the big killer". So it is a natural step to investigate the Greenland diet.

As early as 1908 the Danish doctors Krogh & Krogh studied the Greenlandic diet. They demonstrated that Greenlanders were the most meat-eating population known at that time. The Danish doctors Bang and Dyerberg confirmed this in the studies they made between 1970 and 1979. They found that certain poly- unsaturated fatty acids, the so-called OMEGA-3 fatty acids, are richly represented in the diet, which consists mainly of seal and small whales. These polyunsaturated OMEGA-3 fatty acids may explain the low incidence of cardiovascular diseases. It is true that the food in the diet of the western world also includes polyunsaturated fatty acids, especially since vegetable margarine has replaced butter on most people's lunch tables; but these belong to another family - the OMEGA-6 acids.

Both OMEGA-3 and OMEGA-6 are essential substances which the organism needs to get from its diet. OMEGA-3 is particularly well-represented in sea-food, OMEGA-3 in food from land.

Both these fats are structural elements in every single cell in the organism, and can to some extent replace each other. But it is very important whether it is one type or the other that forms part of the blood platelets. The more OMEGA-6, the stronger the tendency for the blood platelets to clot. This lays the basis for thrombosis, and to some extent for atherosclerosis. In the diet of the western world the ratio of OMEGA-6 to OMEGA-3 is 50:1 (that is 50 kilos of meat for every kilo of fish). In the Inuit diet the ratio is 1:1.

Say what you will, but it's a good point - a few degrees warmer is an inconvenience, a few degrees cooler means glaciers over Manhattan. ;p