Nuclear reactors

[Geoff]

This just in.


We are all going to die.

"..and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they're never going to be born."

[JOZeldenrust]

This just in.


We are all going to die.

"..and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they're never going to be born."

Which is bullshit, because all those "people" who were never born, aren't people. They're not even "they".

We're lucky, because experience is generally interesting, often even pleasurable, but we're not lucky relative to "people who were never born" as that is nothing, and nothing does not have properties. "Nothing" isn't a subject, and it can't have predicates.

[Warren Dew]

Any future for these? Seems we use a lot of old technology.

Fusion anytime soon?

Pebble bed reactor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

Fusion - not any time soon.

Pebble bed reactors - more like Chernobyl than like Fukushima. Not an improvement.

I wouldn't mind being a nuclear power plant sales rep right now. There will be plenty of new plants in China, India, and, eventually, Africa.

[egbert]

Moar nuclear until we can get fusion in like 40 years (hopefully)

Yeah, Fusion is the answer....remember when they told us Nuclear power would be so cheap they wouldn't bother metering it....

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"I told Orville. I told Wilbur. And now I'm tellin' YOU! That damn thing will NEVER fly."

[Geoff]

"I told Orville. I told Wilbur. And now I'm tellin' YOU! That damn thing will NEVER fly."

That just reminds me of Niven's "Flying Sorcerers"!

[nellikin]

A radio reporter reporting on the leak of plutonium detected around Fukushima also quoted a plant spokesman as saying this was not harmful to humans. Does anybody really believe that a leak of the most toxic heavy metal known on earth could be not harmful? Nuclear energy will get the thumbs up from me when the industry stops feeding us lies about its supposed safety and environmental benefits. Oh wait, that's when they go out of business.

[SPMaximus]

A radio reporter reporting on the leak of plutonium detected around Fukushima also quoted a plant spokesman as saying this was not harmful to humans. Does anybody really believe that a leak of the most toxic heavy metal known on earth could be not harmful? Nuclear energy will get the thumbs up from me when the industry stops feeding us lies about its supposed safety and environmental benefits. Oh wait, that's when they go out of business.

did the radio reporter also report on the levels of plutonium that were detected? as it would not be harmful in low levels

[Svartalf]

Germany had struck a deal with energy providers a few years back to phase out nuclear energy by I think 2018. Last year they agreed on prolonging operating times for 'younger' reactors. In light of what's happening in Japan, this process was put on hold and politicians and energy providers are committed to phase out nuclear power sooner than planned. I think that's great news.

That's downright stupid. The hydroelectric resource is tapped to the max, and solar and wind power can cover only a fraction of the actual energy needs, and you know what they will do to cover the difference? use oil and coal plants, or buy it from OUR nuclear stations.

[nellikin]

did the radio reporter also report on the levels of plutonium that were detected? as it would not be harmful in low levels

Given its half-life of 24000 years and its low mobility in soil, even low levels remain a potential threat to the environment for thousands of years. And yes, maybe humans aren't really directly at risk as we don't generally directly ingest soil, but the risk to the environment is large - there are other organisms out there I consider way more important than the human race. That's not to mention potential bioenrichment up the food chain, so it could reach humans anyway...

[JOZeldenrust]

Germany had struck a deal with energy providers a few years back to phase out nuclear energy by I think 2018. Last year they agreed on prolonging operating times for 'younger' reactors. In light of what's happening in Japan, this process was put on hold and politicians and energy providers are committed to phase out nuclear power sooner than planned. I think that's great news.

That's downright stupid. The hydroelectric resource is tapped to the max, and solar and wind power can cover only a fraction of the actual energy needs, and you know what they will do to cover the difference? use oil and coal plants, or buy it from OUR nuclear stations.

A few square kilometres of solar generators in the regions of the world that receive the most sun (Sahara, parts of South America, the Arabian peninsula, Australia, South-East China) could provide the total current energy consumption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_land_area.png

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"I told Orville. I told Wilbur. And now I'm tellin' YOU! That damn thing will NEVER fly."

That just reminds me of Niven's "Flying Sorcerers"!

That sent my way-back meter to "fuck me!".

[Svartalf]

Germany had struck a deal with energy providers a few years back to phase out nuclear energy by I think 2018. Last year they agreed on prolonging operating times for 'younger' reactors. In light of what's happening in Japan, this process was put on hold and politicians and energy providers are committed to phase out nuclear power sooner than planned. I think that's great news.

That's downright stupid. The hydroelectric resource is tapped to the max, and solar and wind power can cover only a fraction of the actual energy needs, and you know what they will do to cover the difference? use oil and coal plants, or buy it from OUR nuclear stations.

A few square kilometres of solar generators in the regions of the world that receive the most sun (Sahara, parts of South America, the Arabian peninsula, Australia, South-East China) could provide the total current energy consumption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_land_area.png

Yeah, a real shame such areas are so far from any civilisations and Joule's law makes transporting said power into not so much of a solution.

and I'll really believe that when the Maghreb and Sahel countries have a real power grid that's solar fed.

[JimC]

Germany had struck a deal with energy providers a few years back to phase out nuclear energy by I think 2018. Last year they agreed on prolonging operating times for 'younger' reactors. In light of what's happening in Japan, this process was put on hold and politicians and energy providers are committed to phase out nuclear power sooner than planned. I think that's great news.

That's downright stupid. The hydroelectric resource is tapped to the max, and solar and wind power can cover only a fraction of the actual energy needs, and you know what they will do to cover the difference? use oil and coal plants, or buy it from OUR nuclear stations.

A few square kilometres of solar generators in the regions of the world that receive the most sun (Sahara, parts of South America, the Arabian peninsula, Australia, South-East China) could provide the total current energy consumption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_land_area.png

Yeah, a real shame such areas are so far from any civilisations and Joule's law makes transporting said power into not so much of a solution.

and I'll really believe that when the Maghreb and Sahel countries have a real power grid that's solar fed.

[Svartalf]

Well, I thought the high sun areas were splat in the middle of the continent while the populated areas were all on the coast?