Members banned from this thread: evince, Leonthecat, archives, Micawber, ThatOwlWoman, Jade Dragon and Nordberg


Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 114

Thread: If They Bet On Nuclear, Not Renewables, Germany & California Would Have 100% Clean Po

  1. #76 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    24,892
    Thanks
    4,196
    Thanked 15,334 Times in 9,321 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,825 Times in 2,563 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    No longer pretending to be an escapee from a mental institution.

    don't you know how stupid that makes you look?

  2. #77 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    484
    Thanked 364 Times in 256 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    As of the end of 2015, renewable energy sources, such as biomass, biogas, biofuels, hydro, wind and solar, accounted for 12.4% of the country's primary energy consumption.

    They will NEVER be able to support their economy with renewable's. You can take that to the bank snowflake.
    Thanks for making my point for me, TD.

    By the end of 2017, renewable energy sources accounted for 33.1% of the country's primary energy consumption. Making that a 20.7% increase in just two years. At the current rate of progress, they are set to blow their 2020 target of 35% out of the water. And will probably reach their 2030 target of 65% years ahead of schedule.


    https://energytransition.org/2018/01...sumption-2017/

    The rate of progress for renewable energy is phenomenal. Surpassing the rate of progress for any other energy sources (including and especially nuclear) by light years.
    “I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.” - Henry David Thoreau


  3. The Following User Says Thank You to TrippyHippy For This Post:

    tff (09-21-2018)

  4. #78 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrippyHippy View Post
    It's still a developing energy source. Nobody is saying Germany can be powered 100% by renewable energies right now. But, it is a fact that Germany is able to utilize more and more renewable energy each year. Germany's green power has grown by a third in just the last three years. 9.5 times more than just last year, which is a record. They produced enough renewable energy (104 billion kWh to be exact) in the first 6 months of this year to power Germany's homes for a whole year.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...-a8427356.html

    California is also blowing right through renewable energy records.

    http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/ele...tem_power.html

    Nuclear power is mostly stagnant. Not much of any progress at all is being made in the technology or application.

    I might also add that solar energy is an easily decentralized energy source so many people could get solar panels just for personal use and save on their energy bill. It doesn't have to be a whole big country-wide thing like other energy sources. Because country-wide application is where we are coming up short currently.



    At the current rate of progress, they are predicting the ability to use 65% renewable energies by 2030. I'm inclined to believe that because they are currently on track to meet their 2020 target. Like I said, it's a developing technology. But if it's blowing through records annually and they are meeting their targets, there's no legitimate reason to believe we couldn't power Germany almost entirely on renewable energies in the near future.

    You're talking bollocks, there is a huge amount of activity in the nuclear world. SMR reactors are poised to become huge in years to come!

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco...clears-future/

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to cancel2 2022 For This Post:

    TrippyHippy (09-21-2018)

  6. #79 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,906
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,396 Times in 6,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    You're talking bollocks, there is a huge amount of activity in the nuclear world. SMR reactors are poised to become huge in years to come!

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco...clears-future/
    Not if we stop 'em, maggot. Your environmental vandalism is unacceptable.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  7. #80 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    484
    Thanked 364 Times in 256 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    Not if we stop 'em, maggot. Your environmental vandalism is unacceptable.
    To be fair, this is is supposed to be a reactor that cannot meltdown. If I understand it correctly. I don't think it produces toxic waste like traditional nuclear reactors either. So I don't think it would be "environmental vandalism" in the way we usually consider nuclear to be.
    Last edited by TrippyHippy; 09-21-2018 at 12:05 PM.
    “I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.” - Henry David Thoreau


  8. #81 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Posts
    862
    Thanks
    484
    Thanked 364 Times in 256 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    You're talking bollocks, there is a huge amount of activity in the nuclear world. SMR reactors are poised to become huge in years to come!

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco...clears-future/
    Fair enough...I had not heard of this yet. It's a neat idea, I'll admit. We'll see where it goes. I like that this is a reactor that cannot meltdown. That has been my main concern with nuclear in the past. My other concern is the radioactive waste produced by nuclear, how does SMR technology combat that problem?
    “I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest.” - Henry David Thoreau


  9. #82 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrippyHippy View Post
    To be fair, this is is supposed to be a reactor that cannot meltdown. If I understand it correctly. I don't think it produces toxic waste like traditional nuclear reactors either. So I don't think it would be "environmental vandalism" in the way we usually consider nuclear to be.
    Well I was going to write you off as just another technological Luddite, but yes you are right. Here is just one of the leading contenders.

    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/1...prototype.html

  10. #83 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrippyHippy View Post
    Fair enough...I had not heard of this yet. It's a neat idea, I'll admit. We'll see where it goes. I like that this is a reactor that cannot meltdown. That has been my main concern with nuclear in the past. My other concern is the radioactive waste produced by nuclear, how does SMR technology combat that problem?
    Molten salt reactors do not suffer from the same problems, they produce very little waste indeed they can run on spent fuel from conventional reactors.

    http://egeneration.org/solution/wamsr/

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to cancel2 2022 For This Post:

    TrippyHippy (09-21-2018)

  12. #84 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,906
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,396 Times in 6,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrippyHippy View Post
    To be fair, this is is supposed to be a reactor that cannot meltdown. If I understand it correctly. I don't think it produces toxic waste like traditional nuclear reactors either. So I don't think it would be "environmental vandalism" in the way we usually consider nuclear to be.
    Believe it- if maggot is supporting it it's bad news;

    SMRS based on fast neutrons produce a lower amount of radioactive waste per unit of electricity generated. The significance of the lower rate of waste generation, however, is debatable. The problem with siting geological repositories for waste disposal has been local and public resistance.

    https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsle...1/reactors.cfm


    Last edited by moon; 09-21-2018 at 12:21 PM.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  13. #85 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moon View Post
    Believe it- if maggot is supporting it it's bad news;
    Bugger off, the big boys are talking!

  14. #86 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    23,532
    Thanks
    3,066
    Thanked 9,764 Times in 7,267 Posts
    Groans
    49
    Groaned 1,060 Times in 1,005 Posts

    Default

    Coal is a problem.
    Nuclear isn't a problem.

    For twenty years, I lived close enough to a nuclear plant to see it clearly from my deck.
    Two or three miles away, maybe, right by the shore.

    The town got a new police station, new fire station, new library, new town hall, new community center, new water lines, new sewage system, new public school --all on taxes from the nuclear plant.

    And the plant was built 100% with good union jobs.

    The electric bills went up a little, but so what?
    It was the folks who didn't live in the town that were bitching about that.

    We were hoping that it would make the water a little warmer but it didn't.
    Oh, I forgot, they paid for repairing beach erosion, too.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to NiftyNiblick For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (09-21-2018)

  16. #87 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44,906
    Thanks
    9,713
    Thanked 7,400 Times in 5,849 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 6,396 Times in 6,143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    Bugger off, the big boys are talking!
    The big boys are laughing, maggot. They can read.
    " First they came for the journalists...
    We don't know what happened after that . "

    Maria Ressa.

  17. #88 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    324
    Thanks
    272
    Thanked 79 Times in 62 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 21 Times in 19 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NiftyNiblick View Post
    Coal is a problem.
    Nuclear isn't a problem.

    For twenty years, I lived close enough to a nuclear plant to see it clearly from my deck.
    Two or three miles away, maybe, right by the shore.

    The town got a new police station, new fire station, new library, new town hall, new community center, new water lines, new sewage system, new public school --all on taxes from the nuclear plant.

    And the plant was built 100% with good union jobs.

    The electric bills went up a little, but so what?
    It was the folks who didn't live in the town that were bitching about that.

    We were hoping that it would make the water a little warmer but it didn't.
    Oh, I forgot, they paid for repairing beach erosion, too.
    Long term solution?

  18. The Following User Groans At tff For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (09-22-2018)

  19. #89 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    23,532
    Thanks
    3,066
    Thanked 9,764 Times in 7,267 Posts
    Groans
    49
    Groaned 1,060 Times in 1,005 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tff View Post
    Long term solution?
    Not an energy expert.
    Don't really know.

  20. #90 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,189 Times in 895 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 88 Times in 87 Posts

    Default

    "Coal is a problem.
    Nuclear isn't a problem.

    For twenty years, I lived close enough to a nuclear plant to see it clearly from my deck.
    Two or three miles away, maybe, right by the shore.

    The town got a new police station, new fire station, new library, new town hall, new community center, new water lines, new sewage system, new public school --all on taxes from the nuclear plant.

    And the plant was built 100% with good union jobs.

    The electric bills went up a little, but so what?
    It was the folks who didn't live in the town that were bitching about that.

    We were hoping that it would make the water a little warmer but it didn't.
    Oh, I forgot, they paid for repairing beach erosion, too." NN #86
    So they bought you off. Fine

    BUT !!
    "Coal is a problem.
    Nuclear isn't a problem." NN #86
    False.
    They may be different problems. But they're problems.
    Coal combustion releases Carbon into the atmosphere that can take a century for the environment to reabsorb.
    Nuclear commercial power plants can produce nuclear waste that remains radioactive, dangerous to humans for millennia.
    "Coal is a problem.
    Nuclear isn't a problem." NN #86
    False.
    "It should be obvious to anyone why conservatives and libertarians should be against Trump. He has no grounding in belief. No core philosophy. No morals. No loyalty. No curiosity. No empathy and no understanding. He demands personal loyalty and not loyalty to the nation. His only core belief is in his own superiority to everyone else. His only want is exercise more and more personal power." smb / purveyor of fact 18/03/18

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to sear For This Post:

    moon (09-22-2018)

Similar Threads

  1. So, We got a clean CR and a clean Debt Ceiling increase...
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-08-2019, 10:25 AM
  2. Renewables are useless: The Evidence is Overwhelming
    By cancel2 2022 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: 04-05-2016, 04:16 PM
  3. The Poverty of Renewables
    By StormX in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-25-2014, 11:32 AM
  4. Germany's REAL reason to cut Nuclear power?
    By wiseones2cents in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-11-2013, 02:25 PM
  5. Germany giving up on Nuclear power
    By Topspin in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 06-29-2011, 06:43 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •