ZombieJesusBrainz (September 3, 2008 at 7:28 am)

Homindae: I know this video sounds propagandistic. I am anti-nuclear and a physicist, Fusion is different to Fission (current nuclear power). Fusion, is NOT as risky as fission, the problem is in implimentation.

KnightSky (August 29, 2008 at 9:55 am)

im going to study fusion and join the ITER team it going to be so kool lol

Aklidien (August 29, 2008 at 12:24 am)

Nuclear fission is extremely safe now, but methods for storing radioactive waste aren't. Fusion has the benefit of producing more energy and no toxic waste. The only problem is that 2035 is too far in the future. Fossil fuels are becoming scarce, which is causing global tension. Already, there have been two wars (the latest being Russia's attack on Georgia) to secure this fuel. If fusion is only available after 2035, more wars will occur.

hominidae7sp (August 27, 2008 at 8:58 pm)

ok! if you say so... you sounds confident, better that you are sure about it hahah

memk (August 27, 2008 at 3:29 pm)

Nuclear fusion IS what you are finding for. It consumes a little bit of material and generate HUGE amount of energy, and radiation is not an concern compare to nuclear fission power nowadays, not to mention modern fission is quite safe now in terms of radiation.

clanOT (August 25, 2008 at 5:22 am)

fucking einstein

hominidae7sp (August 23, 2008 at 7:41 pm)

-we need something else that doesn't burns or consumes much material, that produces more than what it takes, it's possible and it exists, we need something before 2035, starting right now! we know that high radiation is a little risky out of control, many, times!

DudeRoker (August 22, 2008 at 12:11 pm)

Come on... we need this before the world f**** up.

Zovex11 (August 16, 2008 at 4:59 am)

No duh

jaysplaceinspace (August 12, 2008 at 1:02 pm)

Vote BIP, They would put money into nuclear fussion power station