Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 RussArtLover
Joined: 5/13/2010
Msg: 2
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?Page 1 of 2    (1, 2)
Hindustan Times - India plans to commission the first-of-its-kind Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) early in 2013... http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/India-s-breeder-reactor-to-be-commissioned-in-2013/Article1-814183.aspx

Personally I'd prefer a stand alone unit per household. The refueling alone would create thousands of jobs doing background checks to vet consumers and provide plenty of excess power you could sell to neighbors or to the grid of existing companies.
 Demigod1979
Joined: 12/4/2011
Msg: 3
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/26/2012 4:42:53 PM
I am a proponent of micro nuclear reactors, like the one being developed by Toshiba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S). They can provide localized power (eliminates rolling backouts), are fully automated with no moving components (likelihood of accident or breakdown is minimal), use small amounts of fuel (not enough nuclear material to go critical) and can provide power for years. They are currently being considered for remote areas but I think they can also be deployed in urban areas as well (and can gradually phase out large nuclear/coal reactors).

I am also a proponent of nuclear fusion, and would like to see the first self-sustaining fusion reactor go into production as soon as possible.
 Demigod1979
Joined: 12/4/2011
Msg: 5
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/26/2012 6:05:12 PM

Demigod: I like the Toshiba Reactor, except it uses liquid sodium. Lead Bismuth Eutectic melts at 123 degree and boils at 1670 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-bismuth_eutectic
This gives a range of 1547

Remember the transfer of heat is more related to temperature difference, than Thermal Conductivity.

Sodium melts at 97.72 but boils at only 883
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium
range = 785.28

Using Sodium is therefore a mistake, in addition (if it does leak) IT WILL catch on fire. In theory it sounds great but you must bear in mind that thousands of these micro-reactors would be required, whilst a mistake in just one remains one too many.

Well, like I said, these reactors do not contain enough material to go critical. The worst that can happen is they shut down and have to be replaced (and because they are self-contained units and buried underground, the likelihood of nuclear material affecting the local environment is minimal).

Of course this is all in theory like you said, but I generally feel that localized power is the way to go in the future. Additional benefits include being able to handle higher loads (you can literally transfer power where needed).
 RussArtLover
Joined: 5/13/2010
Msg: 6
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/26/2012 8:51:58 PM
Yea the one I was tinkering with back in the 80's couldn't go critical but if a terrorist confiscated enough of them that could be a problem. As a part of being vetted consumers might be required to have live video surveillance fed onto the internet into a facial recognition system or the like. More likely just design in more safeguards, reduce the size so they need to be refueled yearly or less. The fuel stations of course would need some serious security, again, more jobs. The timing is a little off though. The orient needs some time to pay off it's deficit in solar panel development.
 Iredurbio2
Joined: 3/6/2009
Msg: 7
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/26/2012 9:33:56 PM
How interesting.I had a thought about this a couple of years ago.It's great to hear that it could be a possibility.
I mean it sure seems foolish to hack mountain tops off just to squeeze out a little oil.Not to mention the infrastructure
and pollution left in it's wake.
 Iredurbio2
Joined: 3/6/2009
Msg: 8
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/26/2012 9:34:35 PM
How interesting.I had a thought about this a couple of years ago.It's great to hear that it could be a possibility.
I mean it sure seems foolish to hack mountain tops off just to squeeze out a little oil.Not to mention the infrastructure
and pollution left in it's wake.
 KWurx
Joined: 10/21/2011
Msg: 9
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/31/2012 5:08:34 AM
Nikolai Tesla created a means of obtaining 'free energy' about 100 years ago. We don't use it today because there is nothing to be gained from it money wise (which is what the powers that be really care about). What do I think the way forward? Whatever costs us the most and nets them the biggest gain.

I do like your ambitiousness though OP. We need more people like that in the world.
 Tah,
Joined: 11/18/2008
Msg: 10
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/31/2012 5:23:49 AM
I dont think i ever read such a large OP that was so wrong on every level.

nuclear will not bring carbon levels to below 1990, we need to get below 1890 to have hope.

Takes 50 years to cool spent fuel with a half life of 25 thousand years. the only structures on this earth older than 25 thousand years, we dont understand, now would they hold nuclear waste successfully?

for what it costs to build a nuclear plant, that 20 so billion could provide so much more solar or investement in the ability to build solar panels sustainably.

is this guy a nuclear industry troll or?
 Kings_Knight
Joined: 1/20/2009
Msg: 11
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/31/2012 9:23:42 AM
Actually, nuclear would appear to be the next logical choice after petroleum. Problem is, now that Most Highly Esteemed Dear Comrade Leader Obama (PBUH) has decided Yucca Mountain must be closed, safe disposal of used nuclear fuel is damned near impossible. This decision has required nuclear power plants to store used fuel rods ON-SITE, and, once they run out of space for safe storage, they will, of necessity, need to be decommissioned years before their useful lifespan is up.

Obama has already made good on his promise to bankrupt the coal industry, with coal-fired power plants being forced to shutter their doors because the price tag of Obama's onerous regulations (H/T: Lisa Jackson of the EPA) have made it impossible for them to remain in compliance with ( ahem ) 'the law'. This is, quite simply, the imposition of Dictatorship by Edict ... a/k/a 'fiat law'.

When y' trace it all back to its source, give a hearty shout-out to one Rachel Carson and her seminal anti-science / flawed environmentalist screed 'Silent Spring' for creating the current atmosphere which poisons the pool of choices available to the marketplace. Thanks ever so much to the 'environmentalist' and 'green weenie' crowd for making the world safe for their effing Vulvos and smelly Birkenstock-shod feet ... you know, the "Do as I say, not as I do" crowd - like AlGore et Cie ...

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41675.pdf
 Tah,
Joined: 11/18/2008
Msg: 12
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 12/31/2012 12:47:21 PM
go back in your cave, its warmer out here for us that way.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 13
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/5/2013 1:18:31 PM
No. Why choose and invest our energy into picking from the "so called lesser of evil" choices? OUR energy does not have to be spent, neither does our health or our children's health on more hazards.

Can't you imagine other possibilities?
 Kings_Knight
Joined: 1/20/2009
Msg: 14
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/5/2013 6:19:53 PM

" ... Can't you imagine other possibilities? ... "


There are many other possibilities which may be imagined. The real question is, which of them would you and the other 'EnviRites' be willing to consider as being 'green enough' or 'safe enough' or 'acceptable enough' or 'cute enough' or whatever other ridiculous criteria used rather than letting a free market decide which technologies are successful in the field of competing ideas? It seems that only those 'technologies' deemed to be 'green' enough are given any form of consideration by the 'EnviRite' crowd. If a technology is too weak to survive on its own in the free market ( e.g., wind and solar ) and require taxpayer subsidies in order to stay afloat, why, the Little Green Wizards of Social Conscience and Correctness are all about paying them whatever taxpayer-generated ( i.e., non-market-generated ) funding they demand so as to create the illusion they actually generate profits when, in fact, they are all nothing more than interchangeable parts in a giant environmentalist shell game. Every one of the 'green' alternative technologies has been an abject failure in the marketplace. Yes, some are very efficient as 'boutique' sources of energy, but none of them generate energy on a scale anywhere near sufficient to match demand, and none are as energy-dense as is petroleum. Sorry, but until the anti-science 'green' crowd can come up with something - anything - one-quarter as excellent as petroleum, they're just pissing in the wind. That, btw, also includes nuclear - petroleum, no matter what else you may say about it - isn't radioactive.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/5/2013 7:31:41 PM
Too bad the dinosaur's of today don't have some positive energy worth milking.
 Kings_Knight
Joined: 1/20/2009
Msg: 16
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/5/2013 8:21:54 PM
Pity. 'Snark' posing as 'Discovered Truth' ...

An eminent display of the "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit" school of 'debate' ...

Small wonder 'progress' today is all in reverse motion.
 Proteaus
Joined: 6/9/2009
Msg: 17
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/12/2013 2:37:41 PM
I would say fusion reactors , but the fuel would need to harvested from the moon.The moon is permeated with helium 3 which would be needed for reactors , it is in very limited quantities on earth .Other fuels on earth do to much damage to the internal plates on the reactor.From what I read there is enough helium 3 on the moon to provide the whole planets need for energy for over a thousand years.Trick is figuring out how to obtain it.
 ARCH_Guy
Joined: 1/5/2013
Msg: 18
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/12/2013 4:02:52 PM
Nuclear power is more efficient than our current ways of obtaining energy. I would be concerned with a distraught worker that decides to use it for evil!

In all seriousness, I think that there are more advances in photovoltaic cells as well as wind and hyrdopower that we could potentially rely on these methods instead of nuclear power and the use of fossil fuels.
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 19
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/23/2013 10:24:18 PM
Does anyone have the real goods on Thorium reactors?

Micro Thorium reactors ?
 MegaMike_64
Joined: 12/30/2012
Msg: 20
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/24/2013 2:12:33 AM
I'm somewhat disappointed by Tah and DameWrite's sort - because their manner shows that they are fundamentally anti-intellectuals - incapable of thinking for themselves, simply parrot whatever the television says, and insult and snark at people who /do/ think. I have no doubt they're the first to complain when their electricity bill goes up. But they mindlessly echo the party line:

Renewable = good (despite high cost, low output, unreliability, endless government subsidies, (except hydroelectricity) experimental, etc)
Nuclear = bad (despite 70 years of proven design, low cost, high reliability, makes far fewer people sick, etc)

I don't think for a second their kind has actually studied power generation - the rewards, the risks, the ROI. They might hold different opinions then.
 MegaMike_64
Joined: 12/30/2012
Msg: 21
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/24/2013 2:23:45 AM
KWurx said:

Nikolai Tesla created a means of obtaining 'free energy' about 100 years ago. We don't use it today because there is nothing to be gained from it money wise...

Then why don't you do it? If it's "free" energy...

I personally love the the way Nikolai(sic) Tesla has all these crazy fairy tales around him. This whole conspiricy story about "free" energy is (of course) utter rubbish, and a bright ten year-old can tell you the laws of physics as to why.

The variation of this fairy tale I heard was that it couldn't be METERED. Of course, at age 15, I had the brains to realise "of course it could be metered, you idiot".
 DameWrite
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 22
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/24/2013 2:45:43 AM
Asking people opinions on Micro Thorium reactors to see if they could possibly a better source of energy makes you think I'm all the things you called me?

I am not against finding better sources of power and if the nuclear options were safer and we knew what the hell we were doing before we put them into production and on such a large scale and if we thought ahead with health being the driving force instead of using what is financially to gain, I'd be all in.

BTW I don't parrot, I study and ask and make up my own mind, I don't have a t.v., my snark was directed and a deserving witty response, my electricity bill has gone down, right now some are checking into the health risks of smart meters, I am waiting for the un biased results, I am using some solar and when I get more panels I plan on getting off the grid for the house, coal and oil and gas are not the answer, I don't believe huge nuclear power plants are either. If I mindlessly echo'd the party line... I'd be all for gas, oil, and conventional energy sources.
I'm not asking for government subsidies at all.

What is "their kind" anyway?

Now back to my question: Does anyone know why Micro Thorium reactors should or should not be on the table?

It's still not "obvious" to me.
 MegaMike_64
Joined: 12/30/2012
Msg: 23
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 1/24/2013 9:24:03 PM
I was putting the boot more into Tah than you (hence why I listed their name first), but as you're the one who's stepped (back) into the firing line...

DameWhite said:

Asking people opinions on Micro Thorium reactors to see if they could possibly a better source of energy makes you think I'm all the things you called me?

Nope. As you know full-well, I was referring to:

Too bad the dinosaur's of today don't have some positive energy worth milking.

Which just shouts "anti-intellectual greenie" on so many levels, it's not funny. Though, I grant you, Tah's comments were more offensive.


I am not against finding better sources of power and if the nuclear options were safer

Which it is, referenced in the OP.

and we knew what the hell we were doing before we put them into production

Which we did, referenced in the OP... with the possible exception of Three Mile Island. In the other two disasters - the USSR was nearly a third-world nation by the time of Chernobyl, and Fukashima needed to have an ocean thrown at it to blow up.

and on such a large scale

Which we did, referenced in the OP. There are hardly any 1st/2nd generation nuclear reactors left in the world.

and if we thought ahead with health being the driving force

Most technology is actually bad for your health in the long run (chemical pollution, electromagnetic interference, etc). I, for one, accept the trade-off. If you don't, I can offer no better solution than to go live on the moon or Mars.

instead of using what is financially to gain,

This is reality, where it's all about the price tag. If you don't like coal or nuclear, come up with something cleaner and cheaper.

Oh wait, you can't. So resort to some sort of ontological, Bukanist anarchy - remove what we have and replace it with... erm... something else (TBA). Sorry, not good enough!

BTW I don't parrot, I study and ask and make up my own mind,

*cough*

I don't have a t.v., my snark was directed and a deserving witty response,

For small values of "witty", perhaps.

my electricity bill has gone down,

Due to government subsidies, which as a taxpayer, I heartily resent.

right now some are checking into the health risks of smart meters,

Very few credible ones, from what I understand.

It's the incredible claims that get the attention though (see Nikola Tesla).

I am waiting for the un biased results, I am using some solar and when I get more panels I plan on getting off the grid for the house,

Which you can only do with the taxpayer funding it for you! :(

coal and oil and gas are not the answer,

Not in the long run, but you can't argue with cheap. It's the same reason everybody buys McDonald's instead of French fine dining.

I don't believe huge nuclear power plants are either.

And now I understand why. Since you're planning to get off the grid, you don't want to put up with its pollution, etc. Never mind that 95% of people require the grid - it's all about /your/ comfort.

If I mindlessly echo'd the party line... I'd be all for gas, oil, and conventional energy sources.

Is this the same party that is subsidising you to put solar panels all over your house? Clue: yes, it is.

I'm not asking for government subsidies at all.

But you receive them anyway.

What is "their kind" anyway?

Anti-intellectuals, with little understanding (usually by choice) as to how the world actually works - and attacking those who do.

Anarchist tendencies, including demands for things to be removed/replaced, but you have no practical (or even workable) suggestions on what to replace it /with/.

No concept of "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few": you're going off-grid, and so bugger the 90%+ who still need it - tear down those dirty power plants, and let the masses shiver without light!

Now back to my question: Does anyone know why Micro Thorium reactors should or should not be on the table?

It's still not "obvious" to me.

They don't actually generate that much power, and they're an immature technology. Having said that, I'm not terribly familiar with them, and would like to be proven wrong.

I myself am still a great believer in fusion, but with ITER (realistically) ten years away from first plasma, and we probably won't see commercial fusion power stations until 2040... I see no reason why we can't use fission to fill the gap.
 Infrastructure
Joined: 9/21/2012
Msg: 27
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 2/7/2013 11:48:57 PM
Nuclear is an obsolete and dangerous technology. This is the 21st century, we have 100% clean technology like Wallsg7 mentioned. Wind, wave and solar technology is being increasingly improved, many countries and people have already started easing off the old ways and onto these with much success. You won't hear about it because there's corporate interests at stake, so we're fed BS about it not being effecient or a true way forward. It's like listening to a guy who sells horses 100 years ago telling everyone that the "automobile" is unreliable and crap.
 peakbagger7
Joined: 5/31/2010
Msg: 28
view profile
History
Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?
Posted: 2/8/2013 11:16:24 AM

You won't hear about it because there's corporate interests at stake, so we're fed BS about it not being effecient or a true way forward.


Yes, both BP and Shell oil are among the largest manufactures / providers of solar panels and all oil companies make billions making specialty lubricants for wind mills (you can’t just add some 5W-30).

It is just shameful the way these oil companies brainwash people into believing wind & solar power will ever be viable alternatives


It's like listening to a guy who sells horses 100 years ago telling everyone that the "automobile" is unreliable and crap.


Solar cells were invented in the 1800s long before Nuclear and before the internal combustable engine and wind power is so old it's mentioned in the Bible.

So you are right, it's crazy talk from people claiming they want to go forward by using such ancient technologies
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Isn’t It Obvious Nuclear Is the Way Forward?