Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

modestobulldog

The answer is nuclear, not renewables

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, BYUcougfan said:

What are you talking about?  I am genuinely confused with what you think I am rejecting.  You took the opportunity to make some huge assumptions on how I think politically and who you think my heroes are, but other than that......what was your post about?

Sorry, my post started off as a response to your comment about alarmists and then evolved into a general rant about people on the right who immediately dismiss anything about the climate just because Al Gore and such. I didn't mean to imply that you are a fan of Hannity and Rush, that was the general rant. 

No, the first part of my post was directed at you. Specifically, don't let the alarmists stop you from supporting something as good as nuclear power. Too many people do that.  The alarmists are stupid. They have no idea what they are talking about and making a bad situation much worse.

After that, it isn't necessarily directed at you. Sorry, I should have been more clear with my post.

"BYU is like a 4-year-long church dance with 20,000 chaperones all waiting for you to forget to shave one morning so they can throw you out." -GeoAg

l.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, #1Stunner said:

Not to highjack the thread but instead of molten salt could we use the boiling salty tears of byu fans?  I mean after getting knocked out of their conference tournament and the poor showing in football the last decade I'm sure we could easily collect enough salty tears of byu fans to run one of these reactors.  

@#1Stunner.. what do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, mugtang said:

The sun isn’t always shinning.  They kill a lot of wildlife.  What are we going to do with the old solar panels once they’re broken/obsolete?  Export them to some poor African country?  You need 100s of acres of solar farms to get the same power generation you get from a nuke plant. 

I read a big detailed proposal of how to get most of the country run off of solar. It concluded with saying wed need 50,000 square miles of the sw covered in panels - totally feasible!

That's an absurd level of coverage,  something like 10 percent of the total land area. It's an environmental catastrophe; it makes every oil well and refinery in the country look meaningless. 

19 hours ago, Naggsty Butler said:

I'm a little biased, as I am a nuclear engineer. If you want proof that nuclear power can be done safely, look no further than the US Navy, which has been operating nuclear reactors operated by 18-25 year olds for 60 years without a single major nuclear accident. Admiral Hyman Rickover, an eccentric engineer with a talent for pissing everyone off, foresaw the potential of nuclear power in the Navy and used his political connections to get the Navy to develop a nuclear submarine under his direction. The Nautilus was the first submarine to be powered by a reactor, and also the first submarine to travel from the Pacific to the Atlantic under the Arctic ice sheet. He would only choose officers to run the reactors who displayed the ability to make decisions under extreme pressure. US President Jimmy Carter was one of the first Naval nuclear watch officers chosen personally by Admiral Rickover, and was a supporter of nuclear power throughout his life. Rickover demanded a lot from his operators, and was known for his conservatism(not politics). If the civilian industry had a certain standard, he would take that same standard and make it even higher. He didn't want to have any chances of there being accidents with his reactors. Naval reactors are overflowing with redundancy and protection systems. The operators are highly trained and have high expectations placed on them. Civilian plants have a lot of retired Navy Nucs running them. 

Nuclear power can be done right, you just need to put the right people in front of the right technology, which we already have both.

Sounds like a good career track too.

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
2 hours ago, Wyoguns said:

Not to highjack the thread but instead of molten salt could we use the boiling salty tears of byu fans?  I mean after getting knocked out of their conference tournament and the poor showing in football the last decade I'm sure we could easily collect enough salty tears of byu fans to run one of these reactors.  

@#1Stunner.. what do you think?

You're on to something here.... I never saw so many Wyoming tears as when BYU stole their bowl bid this past season...  Those Wyoming tears could have furthered clean energy.

Also...Maybe the powers that be could repurpose the Wyoming Urine Bombs and for something useful, to help clean energy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

You're on to something here.... I never saw so many Wyoming tears as when BYU stole their bowl bid this past season...  Those Wyoming tears could have furthered clean energy.

Also...Maybe the powers that be could repurpose the Wyoming Urine Bombs and for something useful, to help clean energy?

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160418095918.htm

 

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, #1Stunner said:

You're on to something here.... I never saw so many Wyoming tears as when BYU stole their bowl bid this past season...  Those Wyoming tears could have furthered clean energy.

Also...Maybe the powers that be could repurpose the Wyoming Urine Bombs and for something useful, to help clean energy?

Weak sauce sister...not one of your better troll attempts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/15/2019 at 9:37 AM, NorCalCoug said:

I grew up near Three Mile Island, plant is shutting down later this year due to losing money...  must not be very effective technology from a P&L perspective.  The safety concerns are well noted.  Don’t know much about the newer technology though.

A co-worked of mine (Utah alum) worked at the Dept. of Energy during the Obama admin, and I asked this question about Nuclear. He agrees the benefits are there, but the biggest reason they are not investing comes down to the Nuclear energy rates are completely uncompetitive. More expensive than most forms of energy. Sure a lot of this is based on old designs and expensive Regs. The other issue is deconstructing the plants themselves. The San Onofre plant in CA is closing and will be the first plant they ever have torn down in the US. 

The other big achievement to look out for is Fussion Reactors, which promises to make all other forms of energy obsolete. Key word: promises.  

spartan-hands.gif
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SpartanGrad said:

A co-worked of mine (Utah alum) worked at the Dept. of Energy during the Obama admin, and I asked this question about Nuclear. He agrees the benefits are there, but the biggest reason they are not investing comes down to the Nuclear energy rates are completely uncompetitive. More expensive than most forms of energy. Sure a lot of this is based on old designs and expensive Regs. The other issue is deconstructing the plants themselves. The San Onofre plant in CA is closing and will be the first plant they ever have torn down in the US. 

The other big achievement to look out for is Fussion Reactors, which promises to make all other forms of energy obsolete. Key word: promises.  

Another problem that is not discussed much is the disposition of nuclear waste.  Nobody wants it in their state.  I don't think dumping it into the ocean is a good idea long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

Another problem that is not discussed much is the disposition of nuclear waste.  Nobody wants it in their state.  I don't think dumping it into the ocean is a good idea long term.

Just curious, why not? 

"BYU is like a 4-year-long church dance with 20,000 chaperones all waiting for you to forget to shave one morning so they can throw you out." -GeoAg

l.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sandiegopete said:

Another problem that is not discussed much is the disposition of nuclear waste.  Nobody wants it in their state.  I don't think dumping it into the ocean is a good idea long term.

Waste is important, but seems less of an issue since many are keeping the waste within the plant walls. The plant is already designed to contain nuclear materials and the waste doesn't displace a significant amount of area. 

spartan-hands.gif
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...