halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 24 minutes ago, mugtang said: Let’s mine the moon for He3 Hell yes. First we need the tech to make it work. Neither party has the will to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, Maji said: Cold fusion, perhaps https://www.newscientist.com/article/2261246-uk-takes-step-towards-worlds-first-nuclear-fusion-power-station/ I am talking cold fusion. Fusion otherwise does not work lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: I am talking cold fusion. Fusion otherwise does not work lol. And @Maji JET is a net energy drain. It is great research but it takes far more energy to run than it produces. We need to invest in nuclear like we do with green. Period. Productive cost effective cold fusion is sci fi right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sactowndog Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 4 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said: Seems like he is rushing it. Investing and shifting toward is something I would like to see, but when I looked up the two commentators in the article (McCarthy and Moniz), I am going to pay heed to the one who dived more into the science, who stated it was very lofty of a goal, too lofty. Hopefully he will too. And don't kill one energy source until the replacement is stable, please. Good lord. He isn’t going to leave the country without energy. You want to get somewhere set an audacious goal. That is how, and only how, big things in government get done. If you try a minimalist incremental plan things get done via a million incremental cuts. you two ought to actually spend 6 months working in Washington. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Coast Aztec Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 2 hours ago, sactowndog said: Good lord. He isn’t going to leave the country without energy. You want to get somewhere set an audacious goal. That is how, and only how, big things in government get done. If you try a minimalist incremental plan things get done via a million incremental cuts. you two ought to actually spend 6 months working in Washington. Your first paragraph is the exact reason I wouldn't want to spend months in DC. I did spend a few weeks there, as a part of a symposium during grad school. It is a grotesque blob of dutch rudder and quid pro quo. Pass. Either way, we have seen heavy subsidy for at-the-time weak and wasteful energy systems like wind while implementing policy that crimps fossil fuel production. We see calls for limiting natural gas distribution while doing billion dollar hydro-dam installs. And we are seeing the rhetoric of short timetables of zero-emission when the replacement is not going to be ready, based on some of the experts. I get what you are going with with the shoot for the moon tactic that permeates political strategy. But to act like what I suggest isn't logical is as silly as suggesting anyone to work in DC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crixus Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maji Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 5 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: And @Maji JET is a net energy drain. It is great research but it takes far more energy to run than it produces. We need to invest in nuclear like we do with green. Period. Productive cost effective cold fusion is sci fi right now. It's an interesting experiment My point was never that fusion is required for viability. It isn't. Current technology is already useful. The fusion example was to further how irrational the opposition is. You've got my views mixed up here 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkula Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 9 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: You are correct. The right is no more willing. However they are not calling to completely remove fossil fuels from the grid in one and a half decades with ZERO plan. We can run an entire grid with zero fossil fuels using nuclear fission as the primary source of constant energy. We can not with wind and solar. Period. Democrats are the anti science party right now with Biden. But being anti science gives them warm fuzzies. We do not need to wait for +++++ing cold fusion. Where do you get this idea that everyone on "the left" is anti nuclear and everyone on "the right" is pro. This is a problem with the two party system in that we think every problem is binary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkula Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Molten Salt reactors are probably the answer as they are "meltdown proof" https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.interestingengineering.com/how-molten-salt-reactors-could-lead-to-the-next-energy-production-boom The reactor is already in a natural state of meltdown as a normal condition, no control rods are required, no bombs can be made, no expensive containment buildings. The plant will shut itself down if the power fails without human intervention. It burns traditional nuclear waste. Only produces 1 ton of waste that only needs storage for 300 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 4 hours ago, Akkula said: Where do you get this idea that everyone on "the left" is anti nuclear and everyone on "the right" is pro. This is a problem with the two party system in that we think every problem is binary. Every politician on the left is anti nuclear. Or it would have a cent of funding in Bidens radical left energy plan. Oh and no the right is not pro nuclear. Nuclear is a staple of the Libertarian party. Like I told @renoskier we are just smarter. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 I'll just keep my solar panels. Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 1 minute ago, RSF said: I'll just keep my solar panels. They are a good investment Only anti science democrats think they are a solution to becoming carbon neutral. Idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 6 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: Every politician on the left is anti nuclear. Or it would have a cent of funding in Bidens radical left energy plan. Oh and no thr right is not pr nuclear. Nuclear is a staple of the Libertarian party. Like I told @renoskier we are just smarter. Everything I read suggests that major embrace of Nuclear will require increased government involvement in production of energy. So the libertarians should be ambivalent about Nuclear as the answer to climate change, and a lot of them are. I agree that we should embrace Nuclear. But that also will mean a less libertarian energy policy. 1 Quote Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: They are a good investment Only anti science democrats think they are a solution to becoming carbon neutral. Idiots. T Boone Pickens - anti science democrat. Yeah...ok.... Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smltwnrckr Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: They are a good investment Only anti science democrats think they are a solution to becoming carbon neutral. Idiots. I dunno... I think the most libertarian energy policy would be to invest in storage technology, and allow each individual to utilize solar panels and individual generation to fill that storage. No more grid at all. Quote Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Just now, RSF said: T Boone Pickens - anti science democrat. Yeah...ok.... T-Boone Pickens is a big solar guy? Never knew. I just wish democrats would embrace science instead of radicalism. Idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 1 minute ago, smltwnrckr said: I dunno... I think the most libertarian energy policy would be to invest in storage technology, and allow each individual to utilize solar panels and individual generation to fill that storage. No more grid at all. Storage requires the mining REM. Small salt reactors the size of cars can power city blocks. And yes, nuclear power is the Libertarian parties official stance on reducing climate change, just through the private sector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSF Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: T-Boone Pickens is a big solar guy? Never knew. I just wish democrats would embrace science instead of radicalism. Idiots. Solar and wind. Or was. Being dead now. There is science behind renewables. And, with any evolving technology, economies of scale are making them increasingly viable. Quote In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfmanhalfbronco Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Just now, RSF said: Solar and wind. Or was. Being dead now. There is science behind renewables. There is no science in a grid based only on renewables which is the Biden plan. Idiots. Anti science morons. The whole lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akkula Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 16 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said: Every politician on the left is anti nuclear. Or it would have a cent of funding in Bidens radical left energy plan. Oh and no the right is not pro nuclear. Nuclear is a staple of the Libertarian party. Like I told @renoskier we are just smarter. A quick google search tells me that AOC is open to Nuclear as part of the green new deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...