Nuclear Power

[DRSB]

Nuclear Waste and Diamonds Make Batteries That Last 5,000 Years

An entirely new kind of electrical generation system could create abundant clean energy and also dispose of nuclear waste.

http://www.seeker.com/nuclear-waste-and ... newssocial

[Svartalf]

currently less efficient thant an RTG weight for weight, but there is hope for further developments.

[rainbow]

Nuclear Waste and Diamonds Make Batteries That Last 5,000 Years

An entirely new kind of electrical generation system could create abundant clean energy and also dispose of nuclear waste.

http://www.seeker.com/nuclear-waste-and ... newssocial

It only handles a very little bit of the nuke waste.

Carbon14, which is not terribly terrible being a beta emitter.
...and natural. Lots of it around.
Every breath you take has some.

[rainbow]

[Pappa]

Unfortunately, the Green movement in the West has the baggage of CND weighing it down. There doesn't seem to be much rational understanding of nuclear power either amongst Greens or in the population generally. In the UK, we've dithered over it for so long that we're at risk of needing to rely on fossil fuels for a lot longer than should have been necessary. I think governments have dithered mostly because they fear the inevitable public backlash. It's a shame, because had we invested in new nuclear technologies, we could be using our stockpiles of nuclear waste to fuel fast-breeder reactors by now. It's a really safe way to generate electricity and in combination with renewables, could remove our reliance on fossil fuels forever.

[Tero]

I blame the Internet. It confuses common folk.

[laklak]

The lumpen have been confused for centuries, the interwebz have just made it easier to be stupid.

[Tero]

Yeah but now they are stupid about many many things!

[DRSB]

Unfortunately, the Green movement in the West has the baggage of CND weighing it down. There doesn't seem to be much rational understanding of nuclear power either amongst Greens or in the population generally. In the UK, we've dithered over it for so long that we're at risk of needing to rely on fossil fuels for a lot longer than should have been necessary. I think governments have dithered mostly because they fear the inevitable public backlash. It's a shame, because had we invested in new nuclear technologies, we could be using our stockpiles of nuclear waste to fuel fast-breeder reactors by now. It's a really safe way to generate electricity and in combination with renewables, could remove our reliance on fossil fuels forever.

This!
The Greens keep talking about Tchernobyl, most of them cannot locate it on the map, as if no technological advance has been made since. Even pointing out to them the number of actual deaths directly attributable to the accident as compared to the number of deaths caused by smog worldwide annually (about 2-3 mln), does not make any impression on them. Number of deaths directly attributable to the Fukushima accident: zero so far.

This is from Wikipedia

38 people whose deaths are directly attributable to the Chernobyl disaster. Of these, two died at the scene, four died in a single helicopter accident, 29 died within a few months of Acute Radiation Syndrome (ARS) and three died later, perhaps from medical complications probably[dubious – discuss] caused by the accident. One was a cinematographer, one a physician, five military personnel (four in a single helicopter), seven firefighters, two security guards and the rest staff at the power plant or subcontractors. At least one other person is reported to have died of a coronary thrombosis at the scene, and nine children are reported to have died of thyroid cancer (in 2005 that number was raised to 15[8]), but identifications are not known. No members of the general public were hospitalized in the month following the accident,[9] though a pair of fishermen, Pustavoit and Protasov, reportedly received 400 REM doses.[10] There were a total of 137 confirmed cases of ARS, including Pyotr Palamarchuk who survived after a reported exposure to 800 roentgens, twice the usual death dose.[11]

[Svartalf]

Given how our world class specialist in nuclear power can't seem to be able to build the 'next generation' of new reactors that it touts as the wave of the future, (Olkiluoto and Flamanville), I'm not sure there have been real technological advances in large scale nuclear power generation... breeder reactors seem to have been abandoned as a cold war thing, and other technical advances seem to be restricted to small scale, experimental facilities...

[Scot Dutchy]

What happened to fusion reactors?

[Svartalf]

they are 5 years in our future, and in 5 years they'll still be, I guess.

[rainbow]

[Scot Dutchy]

Always amazed at views of the future (1922):



Radio was the game back then.

[Hermit]

Skyping on mobile phones with LCD screens for everyone in 1929.