{ 0 comments }
This week involves one of my last pre-comp spurts of academic work for this term.
For tomorrow, I need to write a draft comp answer on policy failure, inequality, and political economy v. institutionalist v. agent-centred theories.
On Wednesday, my interview assignment for my qualitative methods course is due. I need to finish the astonishingly time consuming task of writing the verbatim transcript, then produce about 2500 words of analysis.
Sometime between Friday and next Tuesday, I am meant to grade the papers for the U.S. government and politics class where I am a TA.
After this, there is just one more qualitative methods assignment, along with terrifying masses of work and revision for the public policy comp. I am hoping the danger of having my entire summer ruined by the need to re-prepare in the event of failure will produce the desperation necessary to force myself to do comp adequate reading and preparation over the next month.
{ 0 comments }
{ 0 comments }
Whenever the many problems with nuclear power are raised, there are people who suggest that everything could be fixed with a substantial technical change: moving to generation IV reactors, for instance, or the ever-elusive fusion possibility.
Another common suggestion is that using thorium for reactor fuel could limit concerns about proliferation, as well as (modest) concerns about uranium availability.
I have read a lot of contradictory things on the subject of thorium, so it seems useful to have a thread tracking information on the issue.
{ 2 comments }
{ 0 comments }
