Members banned from this thread: evince, Leonthecat, archives, Micawber, ThatOwlWoman, Jade Dragon and Nordberg |
Who died regarding three mile island? You know it is still operating right? Dunce.
Communist shitholes would be a dangerous place for the high tech required to operate these safely.
So without nuclear, we will have to turn to coal and natural gas for power then. Solar and wind are never going to be sufficient.
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
I don't know as much as you do, but any idiot can learn that solar and wind only provide infinitesimal amounts of energy to run a modern economy.
The same thing with batteries; the notion that buying cars that rely on them for power as being clean is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. It takes MORE energy to create these highly toxic batteries than they can store.
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
cancel2 2022 (09-17-2018)
SMRs are manufactured off-site in factories off site and assembled in-situ. Once the design is proven there is no need to keep perfoing the same y STS over and over. If the US is unwilling then they can just watch the rest of the world using them instead. What do you mean by solar anyway, are you talking about rooftop panels or solar power plants on the desert?
I'm talking about solar in general. Small- and mid-sized solar generation is popping up all over the place even here in the Northeast. You even see it alongside the highways, where they can take an undeveloped strip of land and pop in a bunch of solar panels. That makes the threshold for adding new solar very low, relative to adding new nuclear. Even if it's theoretically possible to have very safe nuclear power developed cheaply and quickly, if not for NIMBY opposition, that's just not the real world. Here in the real world, for the amount of political capital and effort as it takes to get a given amount of nuclear online, you could get a whole lot more solar.
Actually California does have the capability to provide pumped storage, but it's in Baja California. There are several sites along the coastline but no doubt the usual suspects like Greenpiss and the Sierra Club will do all in their power to stop them. This website Energy Matters, run by Euan Mearns, is brilliant for in depth analysis of such issues. The guy really does know his stuff.
http://euanmearns.com/how-california...100-renewable/
Truth Detector (09-17-2018)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
Allow me to just point out that solar is a tiny 1.3% of the total US electricity production, whereas nuclear is 20%, with gas and coal at over 30% each. I wonder how many people know that?
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Last edited by cancel2 2022; 09-17-2018 at 02:01 PM.
Truth Detector (09-17-2018)
First, I don't know of anyone who wants solar to be the only source of electricity. Most environmentalists are picturing some combination of solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and possibly nuclear. Anyway, to power the US off solar alone would take about 262 square kilometers of solar panels:
https://inovateus.com/2017/08/03/man...smaller-think/
To put that in context, New York is a little over 122,000 square kilometers. So, you'd be covering a little more than 2/10 of 1% of New York. The Northeast as a whole is about 420,000 square kilometers, so it would be a bit over six-one-hundredths of 1% of the Northeast.
I assume a lot of people. However, it doesn't address the issues with scaling up nuclear versus solar. That nuclear generation is from old nuclear plants, dating back decades. The last I checked, the most recent plant to come online was Watts Bar 2, which began in 1972. We've added almost no nuclear since the late 1970s, and the projects that have come online since then have been projects started back in the 1970s, before the Three Mile Island scare. If we're going to expand past 20%, we can't have projects taking decades to gestate. We need to move quickly as solar is now moving.
Fentoine Lum (09-17-2018)
Someone mentioned California I believe.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/...s/map/#qfaults
http://strangesounds.org/2014/09/cal...ew-faults.html
cancel2 2022 (09-17-2018)
Bookmarks