So, I was disappointed to find out that the surface of a neutron star is at 1 million kelvin, not 100 billion kelvin. I did some calculations a while back using the 100 billion K as a temperature (the core temperature of a neutron star), and found that it would be emitting more radiation than the sun (even 1000 l-y away), but mostly at energies that would likely not interact with particles except on a nuclear basis (though still looking at this one). So, imagine my disappointment when I found my error... Goodbye dreams of renewable nuclear energy (at least using neutron stars). On the plus side, glad we're not being vaporized by the relatively "lower" energy photons that such a star would put out... (I just took a look at the visible spectrum for such a star, and let me just say, could spell problems...) So, on a separate note, is there any other way of collecting nuclear renewables that doesn't involve hauling asteroids back to earth, or pressures beyond what are sustainable on earth (ie most nuclear fusion processes)? I figure, if we ever want to really start to move around the local cluster (or even our own solar system for that matter), we'll need to use nuclear energy to power that travel. Maybe this last part is better left for another forum, but it's an interesting line of thinking anyway.