Future power sources for the US
- Thread starter rayfieldclement
- Start date
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,122
- 1,594
- 126
Pray To Jesus
Diamond Member
- Mar 14, 2011
- 3,622
- 0
- 0
Hydrogen can possibly be manufactured or gotten from the oceans and the USA MAY have enough coal so it does not need to import coal.
The last built plat was in 77' I don't think we have built one in the last 20-30 years.
So.... whats that got to do with us not building anymore? And I am pretty sure we are actually constructing a new one right now I am just not sure what phase its in.
a777pilot
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2011
- 4,261
- 21
- 81
I have been calling for this country to have a minimum of 1,000 nuclear power plants. At least 10% of the should be portable. This power plant should be fueled with thorium.
With this additional energy, hydrogen in large quantities could be produced for most in cities transportation. Beside that, with these 1,000 nuclear power plants we could realize a country where not one watt of electrical power is produced with fossil fuels.
With this additional energy, hydrogen in large quantities could be produced for most in cities transportation. Beside that, with these 1,000 nuclear power plants we could realize a country where not one watt of electrical power is produced with fossil fuels.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
Finally some common sense thinking. A thousand points of light!
And its quite possible that despite not having the engineers to run the few we have we could easily train the unemployed to operate them. Cab drivers could be in charge of the portable ones and McDonalds employees could be a double shift by refueling the nuke plants.
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
- Jun 19, 2004
- 24,122
- 1,594
- 126
Right now, power plant's are built to service specific markets rather than the most efficient size for the respective technologies. That is because they are dependent on bonds and other public financial instruments. I propose smaller hybrid technologies that can be paid for by local communities just to provide power for that community. Hydrogen, solar, fuel cell, digestor technologies could all be adapted to meet those needs.
There are also needs that can only be met through large facilities and nuclear power is a viable solution for those needs.
There are also needs that can only be met through large facilities and nuclear power is a viable solution for those needs.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,081
- 136
We need a way to extract thermal energy from air and make it electrical.
Build the fist one in Washington.
:sneaky:
Build the fist one in Washington.
:sneaky:
For cars: no govt regs so Natural gas can be used and so fossil fuel can be used more efficiently... the govt has been preventing the use of natural gas. However, things like the Prius are only 4 cylinder so they accelerate slowly as shit and they're all light and jank.
In general: abolish the dept of energy because it has costed taxpayers too much money and has just been preventing progress. Abolish all U.S. federal gov standards. At the local level, deregulate the utility companies. Allow completely free trade in copper. Local deregulation (including sale of public local roads) would be a good idea also, because that would allow the market to promote DC power. AC is too electrically noisy (unless the power supplies of everything that runs on it are really nice) and it allows for utility companies... while they would be replaced with natural resource companies, at least each household would have (control of) its own power grid.
In general: abolish the dept of energy because it has costed taxpayers too much money and has just been preventing progress. Abolish all U.S. federal gov standards. At the local level, deregulate the utility companies. Allow completely free trade in copper. Local deregulation (including sale of public local roads) would be a good idea also, because that would allow the market to promote DC power. AC is too electrically noisy (unless the power supplies of everything that runs on it are really nice) and it allows for utility companies... while they would be replaced with natural resource companies, at least each household would have (control of) its own power grid.
The beauty of the free market. When people start seeing nuclear engineers and technicians making 150, 200, 250k+ due to market demand, well guess what those people will do?
In fact, you could increase that effect further by having the govt subsidize the education of anyone who goes to school for that and graduates with a 3.0 or higher.
Sounds good to me and should to anyone who isn't naive enough to think that wind and solar are enough to sustain our current consumption, much less future consumption.
Dulanic
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2000
- 9,965
- 590
- 136
a777pilot
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2011
- 4,261
- 21
- 81
Could it be the fact that we stopped investing in nuclear power plants that caused people to think that going into that line of work might not be such a good idea?
(sic)Klown12
Senior member
- Nov 27, 2010
- 572
- 0
- 76
I think we need a two prong approach to our future energy needs. For the short term, thorium fission reactors would probably be the best bet, but we need to put a concerted effort into making controllable fusion a reality.
- Dec 11, 1999
- 16,632
- 4,561
- 75
I think lots of nuclear-powered power plants are fine...as long as they only use power from one big nuclear reactor...
The keys to using entirely sustainable energy are going to be:
Lithium-air batteries have an energy density similar to gasoline. This means electric cars (and also things like electric airplanes) will have the same "tank capacity" as their gas-powered counterparts. And although filling the "tank" will take longer, it will be cheaper to fill up. The smart grid connection will allow plugged-in cars to send power out at times of high demand, balancing the grid and paying their owners money for just leaving them sitting there!
The keys to using entirely sustainable energy are going to be:
- Continued deployment of solar and wind.
- A smart grid that can take power from as well as deliver power to any residence.
- Continued development of batteries.
Lithium-air batteries have an energy density similar to gasoline. This means electric cars (and also things like electric airplanes) will have the same "tank capacity" as their gas-powered counterparts. And although filling the "tank" will take longer, it will be cheaper to fill up. The smart grid connection will allow plugged-in cars to send power out at times of high demand, balancing the grid and paying their owners money for just leaving them sitting there!
a777pilot
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2011
- 4,261
- 21
- 81
Brovane
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2001
- 6,226
- 2,462
- 136
Nuclear can be possible future power source. However I really believe that the NRC and the nuclear industry needs to be overhauled. Realistically I don't believe the power companies that run the nuclear plants in the US have safety as there number one interest. For me I really question to competency of the people running the plants. The fiasco near me with the San Onofre plant. They completely missed the effects of the new turbines they installed on the heat transfer tubes. The tubes where rubbing against each other and starting to fail after only a couple of years. To me this in inexcusable. What really gets me is out of all of this the rate-payers are picking up the tag for this mess that Southern California Edison created. Nuclear plants can be run and designed to be very safe. I just don't trust the people in charge of running the plants and I don't trust the NRC to have proper oversight.
All that being said. The first thing we need is a really revamped grid. The grid is the critical piece when you have large scale renewable energy. Usually good areas for renewable energy are far away from the consumers of electricity. You have to have a robust grid to deliver that energy.
All that being said. The first thing we need is a really revamped grid. The grid is the critical piece when you have large scale renewable energy. Usually good areas for renewable energy are far away from the consumers of electricity. You have to have a robust grid to deliver that energy.
blankslate
Diamond Member
- Jun 16, 2008
- 8,776
- 556
- 126
Michio Kaku also touches on this question in his book "Physics of the Future"
He notes that in about 10 years Solar and Hydrogen will be the same cost as petroleum based fuels because Solar and Hydrogen are going down in costs while petroleum is trending up.
He also mentions ITER. A nuclear fusion research project in France that is being funded by Russia, Japan, South Korea, India, China and the U.S. as well the E.U.
If nuclear fission is part of the future it'll most likely be transitory as it takes a long time to build a reactor and buy the time nuclear new reactors are brought online advances may have made Solar and Hydrogen better options.
If new fission Reactors are built they should be Thorium or another fuel process that is less risky than uranium.
Michio Kaku talking about energy here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_B-2tklDQw&feature=player_embedded#!
He starts talking about future energy sources at about the 9 minutes into the video.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter