Nuclear Power Reborn

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: hellokeith

Originally posted by: Nebor
As a Texan, I'm happy to have a nuclear power plant in my back yard. Can't wait to have more!

The only thing I don't like is that they used to give tours. These days they just have DoE agents with sub-machineguns all over the place, and no tours are given.

Reason #119 that Texas is the greatest state in the nation.

Bring on new power plants! Our 3-section power grid will be even more stable, while the rest of the country gets rolling black-outs and excuses from New England & California politicians.

I enjoy making money at the expense of Texans by investing in Reliant Energy.
Texans are paying 19-25% more for electricity than the national average and the price of electricity is expected to rise by 24% this time next year.

Power costs have climbed more than 80 percent since the retail electricity market was deregulated in 2002.

RRI is up ~85% YTD.
Thanks to the Texas politicians for deregulation. :beer:

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

The people of Nevada don't want the waste stored there. Maybe we should suspend democracy and force it down their throats. If enough money is involved with enough political power players we probably will. How dare irrational fearful people get in the way of progress, right, so long as the waste is somewhere over there and not in my back yard.

Well ya know what.

I don't like the fact that no one else wants a new gasoline refinery plant in their area and I have a thousand of them in my area here just outside New Orleans and our cancer rates are off the charts.

How bout you guys go ahead and stop driving cars so we can produce less and have less cancer problems.

Lemme know when the rest of you get on that please.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i call it as i see it and all i ever see you doing is prancing around spouting crap in every thread and never ever backing up your crap, always returning later with a comment or two that does not adress your initial statements, i'd urge everyone to check it out because it's true, you're an uber-trolling little POS.

I don't think you're just dishonest though, i think you aim to be dishonest and untrustworthy.

I'd pity you if you were worth it, you're not.

I think even "special needs" people should have internet connections and be able to express their opinion.

I'm happy to see you blazing the trail.

 

[Paratus]

Moonie in a nut shell nuclear power generates 1,000,000 times LESS waste (shit in your parlance) than a normal fossil fuel plant.

Try to keep perspective.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

The people of Nevada don't want the waste stored there. Maybe we should suspend democracy and force it down their throats. If enough money is involved with enough political power players we probably will. How dare irrational fearful people get in the way of progress, right, so long as the waste is somewhere over there and not in my back yard.

Well ya know what.

I don't like the fact that no one else wants a new gasoline refinery plant in their area and I have a thousand of them in my area here just outside New Orleans and our cancer rates are off the charts.

How bout you guys go ahead and stop driving cars so we can produce less and have less cancer problems.

Lemme know when the rest of you get on that please.

Moonbeam is working on that here.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Paratus
Moonie in a nut shell nuclear power generates 1,000,000 times LESS waste (shit in your parlance) than a normal fossil fuel plant.

Try to keep perspective.

Don't tell me, I already know. Tell the Mothers. They don't give a sh!t what your opinion is. Fossil fuel plants don't store their wastes in underground facilities because the radiation can kill for thousands of years. Reality has some really bad news for folk like you but feel free to attack the messenger who tells it like it is.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Actually, i call it as i see it and all i ever see you doing is prancing around spouting crap in every thread and never ever backing up your crap, always returning later with a comment or two that does not adress your initial statements, i'd urge everyone to check it out because it's true, you're an uber-trolling little POS.

I don't think you're just dishonest though, i think you aim to be dishonest and untrustworthy.

I'd pity you if you were worth it, you're not.

I think even "special needs" people should have internet connections and be able to express their opinion.

I'm happy to see you blazing the trail.

Of course you don't want to get disconnected but why bother with the explanation?

You are as bright as a broken bulb son, you'll never understand anything and the day you miss your Fox news and hannity you won't know what to think.

If that doesn't work... therapy? I'm lost after that, anyone else have a suggested remedy for TLC's problems?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Of course you don't want to get disconnected but why bother with the explanation?

You are as bright as a broken bulb son, you'll never understand anything and the day you miss your Fox news and hannity you won't know what to think.

If that doesn't work... therapy? I'm lost after that, anyone else have a suggested remedy for TLC's problems?

See folks. Caveat emptor. The above is what happens when you purchase an insult generator on the cheap. You get stuck with lame, old, stale, and unoriginal material and as a result you merely end up insulting yourself. Don't follow JohnOfSheffield's example. Spend some coin on your own.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Of course you don't want to get disconnected but why bother with the explanation?

You are as bright as a broken bulb son, you'll never understand anything and the day you miss your Fox news and hannity you won't know what to think.

If that doesn't work... therapy? I'm lost after that, anyone else have a suggested remedy for TLC's problems?

See folks. Caveat emptor. The above is what happens when you purchase an insult generator on the cheap. You get stuck with lame, old, stale, and unoriginal material and as a result you merely end up insulting yourself. Don't follow JohnOfSheffield's example. Spend some coin on your own.

Seriously TLC, your comebacks are pathetic, i don't get why you even make them, not even a daft motherfucker like you can possibly think they are clever?

Do you know what emptor means? not really, huh?

You're like the child your parents tried to drown but they were not smart enough to realize that they needed water so they just held you in the sink, right?

Now hear this... shut the fuck up.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Of course you don't want to get disconnected but why bother with the explanation?

You are as bright as a broken bulb son, you'll never understand anything and the day you miss your Fox news and hannity you won't know what to think.

If that doesn't work... therapy? I'm lost after that, anyone else have a suggested remedy for TLC's problems?

See folks. Caveat emptor. The above is what happens when you purchase an insult generator on the cheap. You get stuck with lame, old, stale, and unoriginal material and as a result you merely end up insulting yourself. Don't follow JohnOfSheffield's example. Spend some coin on your own.

Seriously TLC, your comebacks are pathetic, i don't get why you even make them, not even a daft motherfucker like you can possibly think they are clever?

Do you know what emptor means? not really, huh?

You're like the child your parents tried to drown but they were not smart enough to realize that they needed water so they just held you in the sink, right?

Now hear this... shut the fuck up.

I'm beginning to lean towards Moonbeam's side of the argument in this thread since you've been so convincing that exposure to nuclear waste can cause mental retardation.

Can you give us some background on when you were first exposed?

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Paratus
Moonie in a nut shell nuclear power generates 1,000,000 times LESS waste (shit in your parlance) than a normal fossil fuel plant.

Try to keep perspective.

Don't tell me, I already know. Tell the Mothers. They don't give a sh!t what your opinion is. Fossil fuel plants don't store their wastes in underground facilities because the radiation can kill for thousands of years. Reality has some really bad news for folk like you but feel free to attack the messenger who tells it like it is.

No, Fossil fuel plants spew them into the air for everybody to breath, eventually drink, eat, and touch.

I guess you'd rather poison the majority than contain and poison nobody.

Naturally you're going to talk about solar or wind, both of which also take chemicals and aren't all that feasible at this point.

EnviroNuts are all the same. They are incapable of rational thought and analysis. You're worse than most since all you can do is run around and troll everywhere, like the M4/M16 thread where you keep trying to troll for reactions. Really, it's quite pathetic that you are so incapable of rational thought that all you can do is goad and be moronic.

Heck, even the most slack-jawed knuckle dragging thug can do that.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Paratus
Moonie in a nut shell nuclear power generates 1,000,000 times LESS waste (shit in your parlance) than a normal fossil fuel plant.

Try to keep perspective.

Don't tell me, I already know. Tell the Mothers. They don't give a sh!t what your opinion is. Fossil fuel plants don't store their wastes in underground facilities because the radiation can kill for thousands of years. Reality has some really bad news for folk like you but feel free to attack the messenger who tells it like it is.

No, Fossil fuel plants spew them into the air for everybody to breath, eventually drink, eat, and touch.

I guess you'd rather poison the majority than contain and poison nobody.

Naturally you're going to talk about solar or wind, both of which also take chemicals and aren't all that feasible at this point.

EnviroNuts are all the same. They are incapable of rational thought and analysis. You're worse than most since all you can do is run around and troll everywhere, like the M4/M16 thread where you keep trying to troll for reactions. Really, it's quite pathetic that you are so incapable of rational thought that all you can do is goad and be moronic.

Heck, even the most slack-jawed knuckle dragging thug can do that.

Gosh, I guess I did invite silly irrationals like yourself to attack the messenger rather than deal with the reality of the message so I really shouldn't complain, but let us take a deeper look into your ravings to see if what you claim to see in me is really you.

LK: Fossil fuel plants spew..............

M: No, you don't say. I never realized that. Well how about we put scrubbers on the plants that remove all the toxins. How about we liquefy the CO2 and pump it to the bottom of the sea. How come the air that comes out of the tailpipe of industry isn't cleaner than the air that we breathe like is the case of the LA Prius? It has nothing to do, I bet, with an unwillingness of fossil fuel industry to avoid the expense and shove the cost down the line onto the health industry and the government, right? It has nothing to do with the fact that the plants are almost always sited where poor people live or far from where people have to live with the smell? It isn't, I bet, a total reflection of the exact same piggishness manifest in the nuclear industry that won't safely store their waste because it's cheaper to let it rot above ground and leak away to become somebody else's problem, now is it?

The pigs are already destroying our world and the Mothers aren't having any more of it with regards to radiation. Out of site out of mind, but you can't take your mind off radiation when you have kids. The irrational fear of invisible rays spook people and there they make their stand. You are the imbecile who will further help destroy the world by beating your head bloody on that wall. Keep on flushing the nuclear toiled that has overflowed. Keep piling up that waste, keep on masturbating yourself with imaginary clean up. That fantasy has been going on since the first day we started using nuclear power. A pig shouldn't play with fire, but you call me the stupid one. I know who I am, but you will not see because you're a child and won't admit you're a pig. You are a juvenile delinquent and an imbecile compared with me.

LK: I guess you'd rather poison the majority than contain and poison nobody.

M: No, like you, I am perfectly willing to allow industry to pollute the air as they do because my genes are good and my power is cheep. I am the same pig as you. I'm fine with the smoke as long as it blows up the ass of poor people. Where my head is I breathe sand just like you and the rest of the buck passing swine. Everything is fine with me so long as nobody raises my electric bill. I even have health insurance, sucka!

LK: Naturally you're going to talk about solar or wind, both of which also take chemicals and aren't all that feasible at this point.

M: Radioactive chemicals? If not the Mothers will be fine, trust me. Where is the government backing of alternative energy at the level nuclear gets. It wouldn't be because us pigs don't know a sty from a hole in our ass, would it? Cars aren't feasible too because they make ruts in the dirt and when it rains the mud bogs them down.

LK: EnviroNuts are all the same. They are incapable of rational thought and analysis.

M: God, you are really incredible. You make some asinine and ridiculous stereotyping brain dead remark and follow it up with a comment that fully characterizes that remark never aware in the slightest that you describe yourself.

LK: You're worse than most since all you can do is run around and troll everywhere, like the M4/M16 thread where you keep trying to troll for reactions.

M: I do have a knack of pointing out to pigs who they are since I know myself better than most and have gotten past the shock and had my ego reduced a few notches. It never occurs to you gun nuts the psychological state you reveal to those with a capacity to see and, of course, you are never very welcoming of insight. But I'm happy to help you since I don't play with guns and know you might blow off your head. I use my gun in bed and am rather secure in that area.

LK: Really, it's quite pathetic that you are so incapable of rational thought that all you can do is goad and be moronic.

M: You, my dear Sir, have show yourself incapable of reasoning your way out of a paper bag. You clearly know it since your inferiority in the area has made that seem like a shame you try to lather over on to me. I know I can reason and deeply so your insults don't bother me. I have no weakness in the area of my capacity to think because I have all kinds of marksmanship medals all over my walls. I have this beautiful hand that pats me on the back. I am the wonderful and glorious Moonbeam who looks down on you from on high. I can think soooo soooo deep I can fall right over my feet.

LK: Heck, even the most slack-jawed knuckle dragging thug can do that.

M: I recommend you stop feeling so inferior to me and take in a bit of what I say. I wish you nothing but the best. The water where I swim is clean and refreshing, come on in. You are a beautiful and wonderful person. Your intentions with nuclear, here, are the best. You believe that nuclear is a good idea and I see it as a disaster. We disagree but I see where you are at. I can play the insult game at least as well as you but this is not about you and me, don't you see. The issue of where we will get our power is going to have to be faced and that should be done based on long and hard effort to build consensus.

 

[yllus]

Excellent! I am going to post shortly the content of a four-part series on nuclear energy being printed by my daily paper.

 

[LegendKiller]

Gosh, I guess I did invite silly irrationals like yourself to attack the messenger rather than deal with the reality of the message so I really shouldn't complain, but let us take a deeper look into your ravings to see if what you claim to see in me is really you.

M: No, you don't say. I never realized that. Well how about we put scrubbers on the plants that remove all the toxins. How about we liquefy the CO2 and pump it to the bottom of the sea. How come the air that comes out of the tailpipe of industry isn't cleaner than the air that we breathe like is the case of the LA Prius? It has nothing to do, I bet, with an unwillingness of fossil fuel industry to avoid the expense and shove the cost down the line onto the health industry and the government, right? It has nothing to do with the fact that the plants are almost always sited where poor people live or far from where people have to live with the smell? It isn't, I bet, a total reflection of the exact same piggishness manifest in the nuclear industry that won't safely store their waste because it's cheaper to let it rot above ground and leak away to become somebody else's problem, now is it?

LK: Then what about the scrubbers? Do they take all of the toxins out? Can you make sure everybody in the planet does so? Where do you store the crap that comes off of them, since most are filled with heavy metals. Additionally, isn't that whole entire process pretty wasteful in and of itself? Does it solve the problem of a finite resource? What happens if the CO2 you liquify and pump back down comes back up?

What about all of the chemicals and nasty stuff in the converters? How will all of that added costs be passed to consumers? Will we be able to afford such a gap measure?

M: The pigs are already destroying our world and the Mothers aren't having any more of it with regards to radiation. Out of site out of mind, but you can't take your mind off radiation when you have kids. The irrational fear of invisible rays spook people and there they make their stand. You are the imbecile who will further help destroy the world by beating your head bloody on that wall. Keep on flushing the nuclear toiled that has overflowed. Keep piling up that waste, keep on masturbating yourself with imaginary clean up. That fantasy has been going on since the first day we started using nuclear power. A pig shouldn't play with fire, but you call me the stupid one. I know who I am, but you will not see because you're a child and won't admit you're a pig. You are a juvenile delinquent and an imbecile compared with me.

LK: As a person whos wife had cancer that might have been precipitated by radiation, I can say that I would feel completely comfortable living next to a nuke reactor and she would too. Why? Because as long as people like my good friend in the navy, a guy with 3 masters degrees in nuclear engineering, is running them and I know the designs reasonably well and discuss them with him, I have no problems at all. Yeah, I am a juvenile delinquent, try again Moonbat. I am not that easy to goad, I think there are plenty of people here who would consider me immensely more logical, rational, and educated than you.

M: No, like you, I am perfectly willing to allow industry to pollute the air as they do because my genes are good and my power is cheep. I am the same pig as you. I'm fine with the smoke as long as it blows up the ass of poor people. Where my head is I breathe sand just like you and the rest of the buck passing swine. Everything is fine with me so long as nobody raises my electric bill. I even have health insurance, sucka!

LK: I have no idea what to say here. I can't tell if you're being a fool or not. I am not the same pig as you, as I don't own a car, take public transportation, conserve power at every turn, and do what I can to stop my other pollution footprints.

M: Radioactive chemicals? If not the Mothers will be fine, trust me. Where is the government backing of alternative energy at the level nuclear gets. It wouldn't be because us pigs don't know a sty from a hole in our ass, would it? Cars aren't feasible too because they make ruts in the dirt and when it rains the mud bogs them down.

LK: Heavy metals? Other chemical pollutants that leech into the environment?

M: God, you are really incredible. You make some asinine and ridiculous stereotyping brain dead remark and follow it up with a comment that fully characterizes that remark never aware in the slightest that you describe yourself.

LK: Looking at your posts and your idiotic comments in several other threads, it's not hard to see why I would say that.

M: I do have a knack of pointing out to pigs who they are since I know myself better than most and have gotten past the shock and had my ego reduced a few notches. It never occurs to you gun nuts the psychological state you reveal to those with a capacity to see and, of course, you are never very welcoming of insight. But I'm happy to help you since I don't play with guns and know you might blow off your head. I use my gun in bed and am rather secure in that area.

LK: I own several guns but I don't have them anywhere near me. Hunting is a thing of my past and my weapons are in my brother's possession. I am not a gun "nut", nor do I claim any egotistical benefit from having guns. However, your condescending attitude only highlights your inability to rationalize and see other aspects of life. You think you are better than anybody else just because of guns? How pathetic your life must be.

M: You, my dear Sir, have show yourself incapable of reasoning your way out of a paper bag. You clearly know it since your inferiority in the area has made that seem like a shame you try to lather over on to me. I know I can reason and deeply so your insults don't bother me. I have no weakness in the area of my capacity to think because I have all kinds of marksmanship medals all over my walls. I have this beautiful hand that pats me on the back. I am the wonderful and glorious Moonbeam who looks down on you from on high. I can think soooo soooo deep I can fall right over my feet.

LK: again, a quality reply. Thanks!

 

[Moonbeam]

LK: Then what about the scrubbers? Do they take all of the toxins out?

M: I doubt it. They can take out much more than comes out now.

LK: Can you make sure everybody in the planet does so?

M: Can we make sure the Russians don't blast their nuclear waste in the air? I don't see what this question has to do with anything.

LK: Where do you store the crap that comes off of them, since most are filled with heavy metals.

M: Would you buy a site in Nevada for a quarter?

LK: Additionally, isn't that whole entire process pretty wasteful in and of itself?

M: That is not the point. The point is that the true costs of fossil and nuclear energy are being born down stream in health and risk of terrorists attacks etc.

LK: Does it solve the problem of a finite resource?

M: No, nor does nuclear. Renewable is the watch word.

LK: What happens if the CO2 you liquify and pump back down comes back up?

M: Look up what happens to CO2 pumped to the ocean floor on the web. My understanding is it won't unless the oceans evaporate.

LK: What about all of the chemicals and nasty stuff in the converters? How will all of that added costs be passed to consumers? Will we be able to afford such a gap measure?

M: We are already paying in health bills.

LK: As a person whos wife had cancer that might have been precipitated by radiation, I can say that I would feel completely comfortable living next to a nuke reactor and she would too. Why? Because as long as people like my good friend in the navy, a guy with 3 masters degrees in nuclear engineering, is running them and I know the designs reasonably well and discuss them with him, I have no problems at all.

LK: You aren't a typical Mother. Very sorry to hear that news about your wife.

LK: Yeah, I am a juvenile delinquent, try again Moonbat. I am not that easy to goad,

M: I made it clear, I think, in a portion of my post you don't quote here, that I was trying to tell you you aren't the only one who can goad.

LK: I think there are plenty of people here who would consider me immensely more logical, rational, and educated than you.

M: I am sure there are.

LK: I have no idea what to say here. I can't tell if you're being a fool or not. I am not the same pig as you, as I don't own a car, take public transportation, conserve power at every turn, and do what I can to stop my other pollution footprints.

M: I told you you are a good man.

LK: Heavy metals? Other chemical pollutants that leech into the environment?

M: Not sure what you mean here but those aren't radioactive and don't freak people out nearly as much.

LK: Looking at your posts and your idiotic comments in several other threads, it's not hard to see why I would say that.

M: There is never an excuse to lower yourself to the next person's level.

LK: I own several guns but I don't have them anywhere near me. Hunting is a thing of my past and my weapons are in my brother's possession. I am not a gun "nut", nor do I claim any egotistical benefit from having guns. However, your condescending attitude only highlights your inability to rationalize and see other aspects of life. You think you are better than anybody else just because of guns? How pathetic your life must be.

M: Well you don't have to claim it to have it or even know if you do, but you are offended by my comments and that tells me I hit some nerve. I gots guns too, and more than a few.

LK: again, a quality reply. Thanks!

M: But you respond to the tit for tat and have nothing to say about this?:

"I recommend you stop feeling so inferior to me and take in a bit of what I say. I wish you nothing but the best. The water where I swim is clean and refreshing, come on in. You are a beautiful and wonderful person. Your intentions with nuclear, here, are the best. You believe that nuclear is a good idea and I see it as a disaster. We disagree but I see where you are at. I can play the insult game at least as well as you but this is not about you and me, don't you see. The issue of where we will get our power is going to have to be faced and that should be done based on long and hard effort to build consensus."

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

When you say I overestimate the problem what the heck do you mean? I see the problem as the fact that we are storing nuclear waste all over the place in leaky barrels etc and that we have not cleaned up all the mess in the form of nuclear waste we have already created. This is a fact. The waste has not been put in any permanent storage facility. What is is what will continue to be because nobody will allow nuclear waste to be stored in their state. The problem with nuclear is people. Mothers don't want the stuff anywhere near them. Your technical solutions to them are pure bull sh!t. If it were possible to store nuclear waste it would have been done. And until the mess we have has been safely stored you will know that all talk that it will be is crap. Actions speak louder than words. Clean up and then create more or be known for the delusional liars we are.

leaky barrels? The ones you can hit with a semi truck?

Permanent storage facility? Yucca Mountain was buried in politics but is now operating.

Do you understand nuclear physics at all? The "dangerous" radioactive material is not plutonium, uranium, and thorium isotopes. The dangerous material has a *SHORT* half life, which by definition, gives off more radiation. This is why cooling facilities are at nuclear plants on site. After the short half life material decays, the long half life material which is only dangerous in MASSIVE quantities, and even then only if distributed in a fine powder and inhaled (it is not water soluable) is taken to a storage facility.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

When you say I overestimate the problem what the heck do you mean? I see the problem as the fact that we are storing nuclear waste all over the place in leaky barrels etc and that we have not cleaned up all the mess in the form of nuclear waste we have already created. This is a fact. The waste has not been put in any permanent storage facility. What is is what will continue to be because nobody will allow nuclear waste to be stored in their state. The problem with nuclear is people. Mothers don't want the stuff anywhere near them. Your technical solutions to them are pure bull sh!t. If it were possible to store nuclear waste it would have been done. And until the mess we have has been safely stored you will know that all talk that it will be is crap. Actions speak louder than words. Clean up and then create more or be known for the delusional liars we are.

leaky barrels? The ones you can hit with a semi truck?

Permanent storage facility? Yucca Mountain was buried in politics but is now operating.

Do you understand nuclear physics at all? The "dangerous" radioactive material is not plutonium, uranium, and thorium isotopes. The dangerous material has a *SHORT* half life, which by definition, gives off more radiation. This is why cooling facilities are at nuclear plants on site. After the short half life material decays, the long half life material which is only dangerous in MASSIVE quantities, and even then only if distributed in a fine powder and inhaled (it is not water soluable) is taken to a storage facility.

Google "Leaky barrels and nuclear waste"

Check YuccaMountain.org for whether YM is operational. And remember Harry Reid says it's dead.

Please don't try to tell me that ALL radioactive wastes are sitting at nuclear sites just to cool off. There is no permanent site for their storage available and they are running out of room for more.

Do I understand nuclear physics at all. Oh golly let me see. Well I do know that I had a deep interest in science from an early age and was reading Einstein in my teens. I know that I went to a large high school and took physics in my Junior year and tons of the seniors in the class used to come to me for the answers to the problems. I remember to my deep and still lasting chagrin that I got a question wrong on a test because my answer was only had half the energy produced by a steam train. Fool that I was I failed to remember, blinded by the image of a car piston, that a steam engine piston is powered in both directions. It still makes me sick I could have made such a blunder. I remember in the 4th grade working nuclear reactors into the fantasy weapons systems I was building and that some of my ideas were used much later in real military applications. I know that I graduated from high school as the science student of the year and that I test as a mechanical genius. And I seem to remember getting an A in chemistry at Berkeley without opening a book.

But I left all that behind to follow where the study of the human mind might lead since I met a different kind of professor, back then, who really knew something.

These days I'm just nobody who knows almost nothing.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

When you say I overestimate the problem what the heck do you mean? I see the problem as the fact that we are storing nuclear waste all over the place in leaky barrels etc and that we have not cleaned up all the mess in the form of nuclear waste we have already created. This is a fact. The waste has not been put in any permanent storage facility. What is is what will continue to be because nobody will allow nuclear waste to be stored in their state. The problem with nuclear is people. Mothers don't want the stuff anywhere near them. Your technical solutions to them are pure bull sh!t. If it were possible to store nuclear waste it would have been done. And until the mess we have has been safely stored you will know that all talk that it will be is crap. Actions speak louder than words. Clean up and then create more or be known for the delusional liars we are.

leaky barrels? The ones you can hit with a semi truck?

Permanent storage facility? Yucca Mountain was buried in politics but is now operating.

Do you understand nuclear physics at all? The "dangerous" radioactive material is not plutonium, uranium, and thorium isotopes. The dangerous material has a *SHORT* half life, which by definition, gives off more radiation. This is why cooling facilities are at nuclear plants on site. After the short half life material decays, the long half life material which is only dangerous in MASSIVE quantities, and even then only if distributed in a fine powder and inhaled (it is not water soluable) is taken to a storage facility.

Google "Leaky barrels and nuclear waste"

Check YuccaMountain.org for whether YM is operational. And remember Harry Reid says it's dead.

Please don't try to tell me that ALL radioactive wastes are sitting at nuclear sites just to cool off. There is no permanent site for their storage available and they are running out of room for more.

Do I understand nuclear physics at all. Oh golly let me see. Well I do know that I had a deep interest in science from an early age and was reading Einstein in my teens. I know that I went to a large high school and took physics in my Junior year and tons of the seniors in the class used to come to me for the answers to the problems. I remember to my deep and still lasting chagrin that I got a question wrong on a test because my answer was only had half the energy produced by a steam train. Fool that I was I failed to remember, blinded by the image of a car piston, that a steam engine piston is powered in both directions. It still makes me sick I could have made such a blunder. I remember in the 4th grade working nuclear reactors into the fantasy weapons systems I was building and that some of my ideas were used much later in real military applications. I know that I graduated from high school as the science student of the year and that I test as a mechanical genius. And I seem to remember getting an A in chemistry at Berkeley without opening a book.

But I left all that behind to follow where the study of the human mind might lead since I met a different kind of professor, back then, who really knew something.

These days I'm just nobody who knows almost nothing.

It sure seems that way, since you act like a moron on these forums pretty consistantly, and im not trying to attack your credibility about nuclear power. You seem to have a condascending tone about everything regardless of the topic.

Oh and by the way, newtonian physics is not nuclear physics. Im glad you can calculate friction.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I do have just one word on fusion that I think needs to be made clear. Many people are big proponents of fusion power, including myself, but it should be understood what fusion power provides and what it does NOT provide. Fusion power provides energy security since we don't have to rely on other countries, fusion power provides huge possibility for expansions since the fuel is essentially unlimited whereas oil, gas, uranium, and coal are all going to be depleted at some point, and depending on who you believe one if not all of these will have "peaked" in your lifetime. Fusion provides clean power with no CO2 emissions, no NOx, no SOx, no long lived radioactive isotopes. However, what fusion does NOT provide is cheap power. Fusion plants are the same as any other power plant in how they produce electrical power, the secondary side will be just as expensive as any other plant, and the primary will be FAR MORE expensive than any other plant. Fusion power is expensive power, definitely more expensive than wind will be and likely on par with solar. So, just remember that fusion power solves alot of problems (energy security, global warming, radioactive waste), but it does not solve the economic problem of cheap power.

It will be expensive initially. But prices will go down eventually.
Right now, fusion reactors are extremely expensive because they're not really even prototypes, as they still don't have positive efficiencies - it takes more power to get the reaction going and keep it that way than they can yet get out.

Right now, the money is going into researching ways of making it efficient. Then it will need to be made commercially viable. Once that catches on, you should start to see economies of scale coming into play as more and more countries shift to fusion generators. Meanwhile, research would continue on ways of making the process more efficient and less expensive.

It's also possible that cheap power will turn out to be like the dot com boom - a short lived frenzy of growth, which wound up being too much too soon. We think, "Hey look, we can dig just about anywhere and get fuel! Let's burn it for electricity! And we don't have to worry, because there's so much of it, we'll never run out!" That's just perfectly great - until it turns out that it really isn't everywhere, and that our appetite for it grew MUCH faster than it should have.

And so, the looming "energy crisis" due in part to China and India's increased demand for the "it's everywhere!" fuel, will simply be a market correction. The dot-com boom produced inflated stock prices, just as the fossil-fuel boom produced inflated consumption of electricity. The market couldn't sustain the dot-com boom, and there was a significant correction. Similarly, the energy market is facing a correction of its own, except instead of being measured in dollars spent, it will be measured in KWH's consumed.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
I am an environmentalist, and I'm all for nuclear energy.

The amount of radioactive waste from the newest reactor designs is minimal. If deep geological repositories are properly sited and built, there are no significant risks associated with it.

By the way, to put things into perspective, Canada's five nuclear plants had produced by 1985 an amount of radioactive waste equal to the volume of an Olympic swimming pool, and that covered two decades of service.

Ditto

 

[BrownTown]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
It will be expensive initially. But prices will go down eventually.
Right now, fusion reactors are extremely expensive because they're not really even prototypes, as they still don't have positive efficiencies - it takes more power to get the reaction going and keep it that way than they can yet get out.

My point is that the secondary side in more or less any power plant is very similar whether it is a nuclear plant, a coal plant, a biomass plant, whatever. So a fusion power plant will always have that same cost as any other plant. Then in addition you have the primary side which requires much more advanced technology than any other form of power currently known to man. No matter how far technology advances it will never change that building a fusion plant will be MORE expensive than building a fission plant or building a coal plant or whatever. So, relative to any other form of power it will always be a more expensive plant. No matter how much it goes down the advances will cause the other types of plants to fall just as fast. However when we run out of coal, gas and uranium it wont matter how darn cheap the plants are since there will be nothing to run them on.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

When you say I overestimate the problem what the heck do you mean? I see the problem as the fact that we are storing nuclear waste all over the place in leaky barrels etc and that we have not cleaned up all the mess in the form of nuclear waste we have already created. This is a fact. The waste has not been put in any permanent storage facility. What is is what will continue to be because nobody will allow nuclear waste to be stored in their state. The problem with nuclear is people. Mothers don't want the stuff anywhere near them. Your technical solutions to them are pure bull sh!t. If it were possible to store nuclear waste it would have been done. And until the mess we have has been safely stored you will know that all talk that it will be is crap. Actions speak louder than words. Clean up and then create more or be known for the delusional liars we are.

leaky barrels? The ones you can hit with a semi truck?

Permanent storage facility? Yucca Mountain was buried in politics but is now operating.

Do you understand nuclear physics at all? The "dangerous" radioactive material is not plutonium, uranium, and thorium isotopes. The dangerous material has a *SHORT* half life, which by definition, gives off more radiation. This is why cooling facilities are at nuclear plants on site. After the short half life material decays, the long half life material which is only dangerous in MASSIVE quantities, and even then only if distributed in a fine powder and inhaled (it is not water soluable) is taken to a storage facility.

Google "Leaky barrels and nuclear waste"

Check YuccaMountain.org for whether YM is operational. And remember Harry Reid says it's dead.

Please don't try to tell me that ALL radioactive wastes are sitting at nuclear sites just to cool off. There is no permanent site for their storage available and they are running out of room for more.

Do I understand nuclear physics at all. Oh golly let me see. Well I do know that I had a deep interest in science from an early age and was reading Einstein in my teens. I know that I went to a large high school and took physics in my Junior year and tons of the seniors in the class used to come to me for the answers to the problems. I remember to my deep and still lasting chagrin that I got a question wrong on a test because my answer was only had half the energy produced by a steam train. Fool that I was I failed to remember, blinded by the image of a car piston, that a steam engine piston is powered in both directions. It still makes me sick I could have made such a blunder. I remember in the 4th grade working nuclear reactors into the fantasy weapons systems I was building and that some of my ideas were used much later in real military applications. I know that I graduated from high school as the science student of the year and that I test as a mechanical genius. And I seem to remember getting an A in chemistry at Berkeley without opening a book.

But I left all that behind to follow where the study of the human mind might lead since I met a different kind of professor, back then, who really knew something.

These days I'm just nobody who knows almost nothing.

It sure seems that way, since you act like a moron on these forums pretty consistantly, and im not trying to attack your credibility about nuclear power. You seem to have a condascending tone about everything regardless of the topic.

Oh and by the way, newtonian physics is not nuclear physics. Im glad you can calculate friction.

You don't understand. I act like a moron pretty consistently on these forums in your opinion. That to me just says you have poor judgment or are lying. And notice that right after you call me condescending you inform me that Newtonian physics ain't Nuclear physics. You better look up that word 'condescending'. From the start of this thread I stated that nuclear power's been a disaster because we won't deal properly with the waste and the public has lost all faith in the nuclear story. The result has been an effort to claim that my reasons for opposing nuclear energy are wrong, that all the fear of nuclear energy is misplaced. But that is not the point. It doesn't matter about me. I knew all that stuff, I would imagine, before many of you were born. What matters is the fact that the waste has not been dealt with properly and what was is a profound indication of what will be. So smoke your dreams of clean up and safe nuclear power, because at this late date it will take a miracle to change what people think. All I have ever heard is that in some glorious day in the future things will all be cleaned up. Get real. Believe it when you see it and don't sh!t anymore till the toilet is flushing again. You will be waiting a long long time, trust me. You can't make a silk purse out of a pig's ear. You don't like who you are but in your refusal to see the mothers of this world will try to stop you and your mad ideas from killing their unborn children. No sane person creates toxins that are deadly for thousands of years, but pigs that what to satisfy their sick piggish needs certainly will.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I do have just one word on fusion that I think needs to be made clear. Many people are big proponents of fusion power, including myself, but it should be understood what fusion power provides and what it does NOT provide. Fusion power provides energy security since we don't have to rely on other countries, fusion power provides huge possibility for expansions since the fuel is essentially unlimited whereas oil, gas, uranium, and coal are all going to be depleted at some point, and depending on who you believe one if not all of these will have "peaked" in your lifetime. Fusion provides clean power with no CO2 emissions, no NOx, no SOx, no long lived radioactive isotopes. However, what fusion does NOT provide is cheap power. Fusion plants are the same as any other power plant in how they produce electrical power, the secondary side will be just as expensive as any other plant, and the primary will be FAR MORE expensive than any other plant. Fusion power is expensive power, definitely more expensive than wind will be and likely on par with solar. So, just remember that fusion power solves alot of problems (energy security, global warming, radioactive waste), but it does not solve the economic problem of cheap power.

It will be expensive initially. But prices will go down eventually.
Right now, fusion reactors are extremely expensive because they're not really even prototypes, as they still don't have positive efficiencies - it takes more power to get the reaction going and keep it that way than they can yet get out.

Right now, the money is going into researching ways of making it efficient. Then it will need to be made commercially viable. Once that catches on, you should start to see economies of scale coming into play as more and more countries shift to fusion generators. Meanwhile, research would continue on ways of making the process more efficient and less expensive.

Fusion power has been an interest of mine for years. I wrote a term paper about fusion power back in high school in 1975 and I've been following its development ever since. An interesting fact that I still remember from that paper - The top inch of water from the San Francisco Bay contains enough deuterium to provide fuel for fusion to power the projected electrical needs of the US for @ 1000 years.

We are beyond the prototype stage. The JT-60 in Japan showed that a sustained reaction and breakeven can be reached with a deuterium-tritium reaction back in the 90s. Now we are building what amounts to the first pre-production fusion reactor - ITER, in Cadarache, France. It should start testing it first plasma reactions in 2016, which is not that far away. Some recent breakthroughs in magnetic confinement processes, which is currently the major problem with controlling a sustained fusion reaction, will help things along even more.

Initially fusion power plants will not be cheap. Once we have the technology developed for fusion though we will eventually be able to build fusion plants as cheaply or cheaper than fission plants and the fuel will be dirt cheap in comparison to oil or fissionable materials.

I hope I live that long to see world dependence on oil phased out and to see a bunch of tinpot dictators shrivel into insignificance.

 

[Paratus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

When you say I overestimate the problem what the heck do you mean? I see the problem as the fact that we are storing nuclear waste all over the place in leaky barrels etc and that we have not cleaned up all the mess in the form of nuclear waste we have already created. This is a fact. The waste has not been put in any permanent storage facility. What is is what will continue to be because nobody will allow nuclear waste to be stored in their state. The problem with nuclear is people. Mothers don't want the stuff anywhere near them. Your technical solutions to them are pure bull sh!t. If it were possible to store nuclear waste it would have been done. And until the mess we have has been safely stored you will know that all talk that it will be is crap. Actions speak louder than words. Clean up and then create more or be known for the delusional liars we are.

leaky barrels? The ones you can hit with a semi truck?

Permanent storage facility? Yucca Mountain was buried in politics but is now operating.

Do you understand nuclear physics at all? The "dangerous" radioactive material is not plutonium, uranium, and thorium isotopes. The dangerous material has a *SHORT* half life, which by definition, gives off more radiation. This is why cooling facilities are at nuclear plants on site. After the short half life material decays, the long half life material which is only dangerous in MASSIVE quantities, and even then only if distributed in a fine powder and inhaled (it is not water soluable) is taken to a storage facility.

Google "Leaky barrels and nuclear waste"

Check YuccaMountain.org for whether YM is operational. And remember Harry Reid says it's dead.

Please don't try to tell me that ALL radioactive wastes are sitting at nuclear sites just to cool off. There is no permanent site for their storage available and they are running out of room for more.

Do I understand nuclear physics at all. Oh golly let me see. Well I do know that I had a deep interest in science from an early age and was reading Einstein in my teens. I know that I went to a large high school and took physics in my Junior year and tons of the seniors in the class used to come to me for the answers to the problems. I remember to my deep and still lasting chagrin that I got a question wrong on a test because my answer was only had half the energy produced by a steam train. Fool that I was I failed to remember, blinded by the image of a car piston, that a steam engine piston is powered in both directions. It still makes me sick I could have made such a blunder. I remember in the 4th grade working nuclear reactors into the fantasy weapons systems I was building and that some of my ideas were used much later in real military applications. I know that I graduated from high school as the science student of the year and that I test as a mechanical genius. And I seem to remember getting an A in chemistry at Berkeley without opening a book.

But I left all that behind to follow where the study of the human mind might lead since I met a different kind of professor, back then, who really knew something.

These days I'm just nobody who knows almost nothing.

It sure seems that way, since you act like a moron on these forums pretty consistantly, and im not trying to attack your credibility about nuclear power. You seem to have a condascending tone about everything regardless of the topic.

Oh and by the way, newtonian physics is not nuclear physics. Im glad you can calculate friction.

You don't understand. I act like a moron pretty consistently on these forums in your opinion. That to me just says you have poor judgment or are lying. And notice that right after you call me condescending you inform me that Newtonian physics ain't Nuclear physics. You better look up that word 'condescending'. From the start of this thread I stated that nuclear power's been a disaster because we won't deal properly with the waste and the public has lost all faith in the nuclear story. The result has been an effort to claim that my reasons for opposing nuclear energy are wrong, that all the fear of nuclear energy is misplaced. But that is not the point. It doesn't matter about me. I knew all that stuff, I would imagine, before many of you were born. What matters is the fact that the waste has not been dealt with properly and what was is a profound indication of what will be. So smoke your dreams of clean up and safe nuclear power, because at this late date it will take a miracle to change what people think. All I have ever heard is that in some glorious day in the future things will all be cleaned up. Get real. Believe it when you see it and don't sh!t anymore till the toilet is flushing again. You will be waiting a long long time, trust me. You can't make a silk purse out of a pig's ear. You don't like who you are but in your refusal to see the mothers of this world will try to stop you and your mad ideas from killing their unborn children. No sane person creates toxins that are deadly for thousands of years, but pigs that what to satisfy their sick piggish needs certainly will.

I understand your point but here's the issue. It's your opinion how "Mothers" feel. The fact is most people are now more concerned over the enviromental impacts of fossil fuels than they are of nuclear power. The anti-nuclear movement hasn't made there case in nearly 20 years but the environmentalists on global warming sure have.


And I'll continue to use my free speech rights to try and convince people that "no sane person creates toxins that are damaging to themselves and the environement FOREVER when they can create 1,000,000th the toxins that are damaging for a few hundred years"

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: BrownTown

Originally posted by: Jeff7
It will be expensive initially. But prices will go down eventually.
Right now, fusion reactors are extremely expensive because they're not really even prototypes, as they still don't have positive efficiencies - it takes more power to get the reaction going and keep it that way than they can yet get out.

My point is that the secondary side in more or less any power plant is very similar whether it is a nuclear plant, a coal plant, a biomass plant, whatever. So a fusion power plant will always have that same cost as any other plant. Then in addition you have the primary side which requires much more advanced technology than any other form of power currently known to man. No matter how far technology advances it will never change that building a fusion plant will be MORE expensive than building a fission plant or building a coal plant or whatever. So, relative to any other form of power it will always be a more expensive plant. No matter how much it goes down the advances will cause the other types of plants to fall just as fast. However when we run out of coal, gas and uranium it wont matter how darn cheap the plants are since there will be nothing to run them on.

True, but the latter point is part of the cost, too. Fusion reactors would run on deuterium, obtained from the oceans, or possibly from helium isotopes found on the Moon. But assuming deuterium, that's a resource that we know that will basically never run out. By the time it does, I'd hope that we'd have colonized the Moon, as it would just be that far into the future.

So yes, it will definitely be more expensive in terms of simple monetary investment. But it will be "cheaper" in terms of overall environmental impact.

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Fusion power has been an interest of mine for years. I wrote a term paper about fusion power back in high school in 1975 and I've been following its development ever since. An interesting fact that I still remember from that paper - The top inch of water from the San Francisco Bay contains enough deuterium to provide fuel for fusion to power the projected electrical needs of the US for @ 1000 years.

We are beyond the prototype stage. The JT-60 in Japan showed that a sustained reaction and breakeven can be reached with a deuterium-tritium reaction back in the 90s. Now we are building what amounts to the first pre-production fusion reactor - ITER, in Cadarache, France. It should start testing it first plasma reactions in 2016, which is not that far away. Some recent breakthroughs in magnetic confinement processes, which is currently the major problem with controlling a sustained fusion reaction, will help things along even more.

Initially fusion power plants will not be cheap. Once we have the technology developed for fusion though we will eventually be able to build fusion plants as cheaply or cheaper than fission plants and the fuel will be dirt cheap in comparison to oil or fissionable materials.

I hope I live that long to see world dependence on oil phased out and to see a bunch of tinpot dictators shrivel into insignificance.

So wait, we have reached a break-even point? Or is it something that appears to be within our grasp in the next few years? Just getting to the break-even point would seem to me like a very significant advance.

I would love to see that, too. Those whose (political) power is solely based on fossil fuels will probably throw a horrific tantrum, which will likely cost lives. But ultimately, the entire world would welcome an end to this form of control, and embrace clean, virtually limitless energy.
A hydrogen-based economy could become more viable - now part of the worry is that producing pure hydrogen would take electricity, generated by burning fossil fuels: burning fossil fuels in power plants to prevent the burning of fossil fuels in cars.

But producing hydrogen from fusion power plants would be a clean way of making an environmentally friendly fuel.

The other option is to hope for some major advance in battery technology between now and then, finally making a long-range electric car a possibility.