No climate change if world embraced nuclear
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,184
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Remember the story of the kid David Hahn, who tried to build a nuclear reactor using material cannibalized from smoke detectors?
I didn't. I just looked him up, quite an amusing story if you ignore the rest of his life.
Yeah, tragic would be more appropriate. I wonder if the people who've cashed in on his tale intend on ever including the ending.
_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
There was some talk about opening a new coal mine in Cumbria but they had to backtrack on it.
I think that was more about steel manufacturing than power generation though.
I think also we may have had to fire up some decommissioned coal power plants because there was low wind this year and the undersea power cable was out for some reason.
_________________
Was that really necessary?
MuddRM
Velociraptor
Joined: 2 Sep 2021
Gender: Male
Posts: 437
Location: Beautiful(?) West Manchester Township, PA
There's a lot of pretty serious disadvantages too.
It'd be nice to have more public discussions and see further developments in the field and with the risks that climate change represent it needs to be understood that the CBA when it comes to fossil fuels vs. nuclear is shifting. That said, the issues of disposing of wastes are still a serious and inadequately resolved issue.
I find that hard to believe.
But assuming you are correct, is it a greater issue than the catastrophe of "Global Warming"?
I find that hard to believe.
I'm not sure if it's a greater issue, like I said, the CBA is shifting in favour of nuclear even with those inherent risks.
What has the Commonwealth Bank of Australia go to do with anything/k? <joke>
Please talk to the left-wing troglodytes, here in Australia.
How quickly we forget. Three letters wil suffice: TMI. I remember that near disaster all too well, as I was a junior in college in Western PA.
To make it even more interesting, there are 3 nuclear power plants within 150 miles of my home: First Energy’s Three Mile Island in Middletown, Dauphin County (now decommissioned) and PECO’s (Filthydelphia Electric) Peach Bottom plant in southeastern Lancaster County, and both located on the Susquehanna River and Limerick Nuclear Power station, near Norristown, Montgomery County on the Schuykill (aka the Sure-kill) River.
If I had a choice of coal-powered electric generation and nuclear generation, I’ll take coal powered over nuclear power anyway. Technology has at least advanced to the point of cleaner emissions from coal-fired plants than it was over 50 years ago. Also, for me, at least, I can see what is making me sick, as compared to nuclear power.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,184
Location: Right over your left shoulder
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
There was some talk about opening a new coal mine in Cumbria but they had to backtrack on it.
I think that was more about steel manufacturing than power generation though.
I think also we may have had to fire up some decommissioned coal power plants because there was low wind this year and the undersea power cable was out for some reason.
The irony.
It has been reported that "Wind Stilling" has been caused by climate change.
I guess god doesn't want humanity to survive and snookers every action it takes.
Drop in wind speeds linked to ‘global stilling’ and climate change, scientists say
The strength of the wind blowing across northern Europe has fallen by as much as 15 per cent on average in places this year, according to data compiled by Vortex, an independent weather modelling group.
The cause of the decrease is uncertain, say scientists, but one possible explanation is a phenomenon called global stilling. This is a decrease in average surface wind speed owing to climate change.
https://www.ft.com/content/d53b5843-dbe ... c66127ea80
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
I don't believe that is true for *new* coal fire plants.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,184
Location: Right over your left shoulder
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
I don't believe that is true for *new* coal fire plants.
You burn coal, it produces carbon dioxide, right? There's discussion of implementing technology to sequester CO2 but nothing has been towards that goal beyond discussion.
_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
There was some talk about opening a new coal mine in Cumbria but they had to backtrack on it.
I think that was more about steel manufacturing than power generation though.
I think also we may have had to fire up some decommissioned coal power plants because there was low wind this year and the undersea power cable was out for some reason.
The irony.
It has been reported that "Wind Stilling" has been caused by climate change.
I guess god doesn't want humanity to survive and snookers every action it takes.
Drop in wind speeds linked to ‘global stilling’ and climate change, scientists say
The strength of the wind blowing across northern Europe has fallen by as much as 15 per cent on average in places this year, according to data compiled by Vortex, an independent weather modelling group.
The cause of the decrease is uncertain, say scientists, but one possible explanation is a phenomenon called global stilling. This is a decrease in average surface wind speed owing to climate change.
https://www.ft.com/content/d53b5843-dbe ... c66127ea80
It's probably just normal variation, helpfully demonstrating why a "fully renewable grid" as imagined by most people just won't work - wind (and solar) is unreliable not over days, but over months and the long term energy storage necessary to survive these lulls is astronomical and can never be built.
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
There was some talk about opening a new coal mine in Cumbria but they had to backtrack on it.
I think that was more about steel manufacturing than power generation though.
I think also we may have had to fire up some decommissioned coal power plants because there was low wind this year and the undersea power cable was out for some reason.
The irony.
It has been reported that "Wind Stilling" has been caused by climate change.
I guess god doesn't want humanity to survive and snookers every action it takes.
Drop in wind speeds linked to ‘global stilling’ and climate change, scientists say
The strength of the wind blowing across northern Europe has fallen by as much as 15 per cent on average in places this year, according to data compiled by Vortex, an independent weather modelling group.
The cause of the decrease is uncertain, say scientists, but one possible explanation is a phenomenon called global stilling. This is a decrease in average surface wind speed owing to climate change.
https://www.ft.com/content/d53b5843-dbe ... c66127ea80
It's probably just normal variation, helpfully demonstrating why a "fully renewable grid" as imagined by most people just won't work - wind (and solar) is unreliable not over days, but over months and the long term energy storage necessary to survive these lulls is astronomical and can never be built.
And the carbon footprint of this new technology is very large, also, so I have heard.
People generally don't think about that.
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
I don't believe that is true for *new* coal fire plants.
You burn coal, it produces carbon dioxide, right? There's discussion of implementing technology to sequester CO2 but nothing has been towards that goal beyond discussion.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/envir ... n-coal.htm
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,184
Location: Right over your left shoulder
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
I don't believe that is true for *new* coal fire plants.
You burn coal, it produces carbon dioxide, right? There's discussion of implementing technology to sequester CO2 but nothing has been towards that goal beyond discussion.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/envir ... n-coal.htm
You can't purify the carbon from coal, coal is carbon.
This explains many so-called clean coal technologies, although I would assume it has a pro-nuclear bias:
https://world-nuclear.org/information-l ... ogies.aspx
_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
They certainly haven't done anything to reduce the carbon emissions from coal-fired plants, which is the most pressing concern related to their operation at the moment.
I don't believe that is true for *new* coal fire plants.
You burn coal, it produces carbon dioxide, right? There's discussion of implementing technology to sequester CO2 but nothing has been towards that goal beyond discussion.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/envir ... n-coal.htm
You can't purify the carbon from coal, coal is carbon.
This explains many so-called clean coal technologies, although I would assume it has a pro-nuclear bias:
https://world-nuclear.org/information-l ... ogies.aspx
https://science.howstuffworks.com/envir ... n-coal.htm
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,184
Location: Right over your left shoulder
If you do more reading you'll see that it's not a technology that's been implemented in a meaningful way yet. Don't mistake a best-case scenario for the future with something that's already the norm.
_________________
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made... and they won't even admit the knife is there." Malcolm X
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
50 year nuclear battery developed |
20 Mar 2024, 2:43 am |
Tedium, routine and change |
21 Jan 2024, 6:39 am |
Suggestion to the change of the name Wrong Planet |
11 Feb 2024, 4:56 pm |
Green Day song lyric change earns my respect |
15 Jan 2024, 10:49 pm |