| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
..
9 |
TMW
Select Nomad
Posts: 10659
Registered: 9-1-2003
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Mexitron  | | Quote: Originally posted by TMW | You can put up all the solar panels you want or wind generators but you still need power plants for backup. The sun don't shine at night and the wind
does not always blow. If you are talking about an individual home OK but not a US home on the grid.
Electric cars a OK for the city but you are not going on vacation in one unless you are rich and can afford a Tesla and even then it has only a 250
mile +/- range. Hydrogen, where is it. Before you say the car companies are holding it back then why don't the university brain-e-acts design and
build one.
The best we can do is regulate for better gas mileage and cleaner emissions on cars and trucks until something better comes along. We can also get rid
of coal plants and use natural gas.
I believe in nuclear power but it probably won't happen. Our nuclear polices are stupid. It is dumb that this country can't find and agree on a place
to put the waste. It is also dumb that we can't recycle the nuclear waste. |
Small modular nukes, like the type running on carriers, might be an option. Lockheed says they'll have a small fusion reactor market-ready in ten
years. Hydrogen has been ready for years now, just a matter of having the power sources ready to fuel it. I don't like electric cars personally--too
much heavy metals/disposal problems and what's the point if the electricity is generated by a coal plant?
There are ways to stores solar and wind power for night use--for instance PGE's reservoir turbine and pump they use for storing off peak power use.
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by Mexitron]
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by Mexitron] |
I had a neighbor who was in the navy on a nuke sub and I asked him about nuke power plants and he said the problem with commercial plants was the
safety training compared to the navy. On a ship they are always training for something going wrong and he did not think the commercial plants did so.
In my opinion they should build nuclear plants the same or close to the same similar to what France did or does.
As for hydrogen cars I've been reading it would be available for about 50 years or more. I'm still waiting.
|
|
|
bezzell
Nomad
Posts: 444
Registered: 11-30-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
Civilization is a heat engine.
NEXT !?
(and be forever grateful you're not the grandkids)
edit: unless of course, someone comes along with a greenhouse gas extraction method. So far, not.
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by bezzell]
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
TMW (heh, David should love this!)
http://www.toyota.com/mirai/?srchid=sem|google|Mirai|Segment...
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by bezzell | Civilization is a heat engine.
NEXT !?
(and be forever grateful you're not the grandkids)
edit: unless of course, someone comes along with a greenhouse gas extraction method. So far, not.
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by bezzell] |
A fellow awhile back thought that simply seeding the less nutrient-rich areas of the oceans with phosphorus would result in algae/microbial growth
which would absorb carbon as it grew...when the organisms died they would sink to the bottom and essentially become a carbon sink...
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
The "waste stream" from nuclear power generation, if used by the entire world, would pose a significant disposal problem in a number of ways
"A long cooling-off period for San Onofre nuclear plant"
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/08/local/la-me-san-onof...
IF we could deal with radio active waste generation an/or contamination from a release .. It would make a lot of sense in solving our energy problem
Some just don't see nuclear power generation as viable long term .. like Germany and apparently the people of Japan and a number of other countries
within the EU
Japan to restart nuclear reactors, despite political opposition
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2015/0609...
This one is a very hard "nut" to crack ... power without environmental problems
I still think weŽ can come up with something ... just have to put more money into science to find the solution ... The "LHC" is our only hope IMHO ..
in the mean time, about all we can do is tread water ... as the population is forecast to increase, which of course will demand even greater amounts
of "energy" .. not less
And was Carter off the mark, or, was his suggestions to move away from greater use of "oil" incorrect, looking at where we are today ?
And bringing him back would have little effect ... given the current view by most folks on this subject ... which would include the providers of
"power" along with our Government ... "Bama" ok'ed the building out of MORE nuclear generators to help
A tough one, asking people to do with LESS ... here in the United States ... and most other places in the world, we have become accustomed to this
level of living conditions ... and I'm not complaining .. we live a good life here in the Untied States, regardless what we read in the papers daily
.. sure there are problems, but, over all not bad for the vast majority of people in the country ... and no one said it would be "fair"
We just need to clean it up ... as other industries have had to do over the past half century or more ... and it will cost more, not less .. Its the
way it works in this world
"Startups have figured out how to remove carbon from the air. Will anyone pay them to do it?"
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jul/14/...
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by wessongroup]
|
|
|
TMW
Select Nomad
Posts: 10659
Registered: 9-1-2003
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm all for it and hope it works out.
It's interesting about electric cars, at the auto museum in Reno there is an electric car built in 1916 that could go 80 miles. Today we have only one
that can exceed that mileage, the Tesla.
|
|
|
TMW
Select Nomad
Posts: 10659
Registered: 9-1-2003
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
I was listening to a guy on radio several months ago who said that all the nuclear waste produced by power plants in the US would fit in a cube the
size of a football field. He also said if we recycled the waste for use the resulting waste would fit in a cube 12ftx12ftx12ft. If that is correct
surely we can find a place to put it for the next million years.
I get it that people are scared to death of nuclear energy and they like to use the Three Mile Island accident as an example but to set the record
straight no one was killed by the TMI accident. Nor were there any increase in cancer deaths as many claim. It was an accident and the radioactive
release should have been prevented.
|
|
|
bombero
Junior Nomad
Posts: 42
Registered: 11-16-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
Look Out
Melting ice packs, rising oceans, increasing footprints on the earth,climate change??? There won,t be any more discussions on these topics soon. There
wont need to be. But there will be ever decreasing footprints on this Earth. As soon as the Muslim extremists " act badly " after getting a nuclear
bomb and missiles, the dust clouds will cover the earth, the ice age will return. No more melting ice packs, no rising oceans no more increasing
foot prints, no more worry. Religious Extremists will destroy the Earth long before carbon emissions. If the human race gets a second chance, maybe
then, we can get it right.
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
"U.S. Nuclear Waste Increasing With No Permanent Storage Available
The U.S. nuclear industry says the waste is being stored safely at power-plant sites, though it has long pushed for a long-term storage facility.
Meanwhile, the industry's collective pile of waste is growing by about 2,200 tons a year; experts say some of the pools in the United States contain
four times the amount of spent fuel that they were designed to handle.
The AP analyzed a state-by-state summary of spent fuel data based on information that nuclear power plants voluntarily report every
year to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry and lobbying group. The NEI would not make available the amount of spent fuel at individual
power plants."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/23/us-nuclear-waste-ra...
Of note ... the former head of the NRC resigned over "Bama's" adoption of using the "type" of reactors which will be going in and/or up in states
across the nation
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by wessongroup]
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by TMW | I was listening to a guy on radio several months ago who said that all the nuclear waste produced by power plants in the US would fit in a cube the
size of a football field. He also said if we recycled the waste for use the resulting waste would fit in a cube 12ftx12ftx12ft. If that is correct
surely we can find a place to put it for the next million years.
I get it that people are scared to death of nuclear energy and they like to use the Three Mile Island accident as an example but to set the record
straight no one was killed by the TMI accident. Nor were there any increase in cancer deaths as many claim. It was an accident and the radioactive
release should have been prevented. |
Well, there was a suitable site called Yucca Mountain but folks got scared I guess. Might indeed find a use for the spent fuel someday.
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18125
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by TMW |
I get it that people are scared to death of nuclear energy and they like to use the Three Mile Island accident as an example but to set the record
straight no one was killed by the TMI accident. Nor were there any increase in cancer deaths as many claim. It was an accident and the radioactive
release should have been prevented. |
TMI was nothing! What about chernobyl and ***ushima? Yikes!
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18125
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
The japanese disaster was so bad that nomad censors the name!
|
|
|
monoloco
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6667
Registered: 7-13-2009
Location: Pescadero BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by TMW | I was listening to a guy on radio several months ago who said that all the nuclear waste produced by power plants in the US would fit in a cube the
size of a football field. He also said if we recycled the waste for use the resulting waste would fit in a cube 12ftx12ftx12ft. If that is correct
surely we can find a place to put it for the next million years.
I get it that people are scared to death of nuclear energy and they like to use the Three Mile Island accident as an example but to set the record
straight no one was killed by the TMI accident. Nor were there any increase in cancer deaths as many claim. It was an accident and the radioactive
release should have been prevented. |
It must be true if "some guy" said it on the radio. LOL.
"The future ain't what it used to be"
|
|
|
motoged
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6481
Registered: 7-31-2006
Location: Kamloops, BC
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gettin' Better
|
|
"Untied"..... perhaps a typo....perhaps not....but it fits.
There seems to be a dis-integration of political boundaries all over the planet....which can't help but slow down a unified process of addressing
these universal issues...
Some good links offered.
Don't believe everything you think....
|
|
|
wessongroup
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21152
Registered: 8-9-2009
Location: Mission Viejo
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suicide Hot line ... please hold
|
|
Thanks moto ... was thinking in terms of folks around the world that don't even have: water, food, shelter or medicine ...
Compared to those poor folks, we live beyond their comprehension .. . for them to "cut back" is not possible, unless through death
A 10' rise would have impact ... and it would appear at this time there is no way back ... even if we could "suck" all the CO2 out of the Atmosphere
... the largest heat sinks know to man (oceans) have been working over time for a while ... and all that energy will have to go some place
We could worry about Global Cooling ... as that is projected to be the next step, by some
I don't have concern over warming and cooling cycles ... only the "extreme's" ... which is true in most situations 
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by wessongroup]
|
|
|
SFandH
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7084
Registered: 8-5-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
nuclear "waste"? Some of those uranium 238 atoms in the fuel rods absorbed a neutron and became plutonium 239.
A gram of Pu 239 metal is worth $10,990. So an ounce would be 28 * 10,990 or
one ounce Pu 239 metal is worth $307,720!
Plus even though spent fuel rods are no longer useful for power generation they still contain considerable uranium 235 and 238.
Spent fuel rods sitting in pools of water while they cool off (short lived radionuclides decay away) at the reactor facilities are not waste.
At least that's the way some see it.
http://science.energy.gov/nbl/certified-reference-materials/...
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by SFandH]
|
|
|
PaulW
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3060
Registered: 5-21-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Sad situation. Glaciers have increased in size or stayed the same for the last 5 years and this discarded NASA crackpot says they are melting.
And the real qualified scientists are reluctant to speak up for fear that they will be shouted down by the lefty's and could loose their research
support for the real science.
Be a skeptic and wait for real facts not frivolous projections based of political influence.
PW
|
|
|
rts551
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6699
Registered: 9-5-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by PaulW | Sad situation. Glaciers have increased in size or stayed the same for the last 5 years and this discarded NASA crackpot says they are melting.
And the real qualified scientists are reluctant to speak up for fear that they will be shouted down by the lefty's and could loose their research
support for the real science.
Be a skeptic and wait for real facts not frivolous projections based of political influence.
PW
|
Who are the REAL qualified scientists?
|
|
|
PaulW
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3060
Registered: 5-21-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Difficult to ID them because they are the silent majority. And they do not want publicity as I said before. Their studies and findings are out there
and not in the general public view. We only get snips if their findings and they contradict the reports that have the warming agenda to publicize.
|
|
|
SFandH
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7084
Registered: 8-5-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by PaulW | | We only get snips if their findings and they contradict the reports that have the warming agenda to publicize. |
Agenda? What do you think the agenda is? Do you believe the scientists who say global warming is happening have an objective other than informing
people of what they think? If so, what is it?
[Edited on 7-23-2015 by SFandH]
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
..
9 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
