Ukrainians aren't sweating; should we?

[cancel2 2022]

Once again, the wonk response: future theory vs. present day reality. Here's what you can't/won't deal with.....so spare us all YOUR "bs waste canard":

You're incredibly naive and uninformed when it comes to all things nuclear. I've learnt from experience that you just can't deal with the science calmly and logically, preferring instead to indulge in emotion laded psychobabble.

 

[Taichiliberal]

"They are lying to you."
Tucker

Says a joke pretending to be an informed commentator. Carlson has been fact checked into the joke that he is...throwing red meat to the willfully ignorant MAGA minions.

 

[BidenPresident]

Let's get real; as far as the average working class American is concerned, what's going on in the Ukraine isn't putting money in their pocket, food on the table or a roof over their heads, let alone decent bridges, clean water to drink, a fair justice system ... well, you get the picture.

What does working class status have to do with US policy toward Ukraine?

 

[Taichiliberal]

It's moved to Wyoming, dozy cunt!

A nuclear power startup founded by Bill Gates has announced plans to build a new kind of nuclear reactor at a retiring coal plant in Wyoming

This reactor will be the first real-world demonstration of the startup’s technology, which could help power the world — without warming the climate.

Nuclear power: Splitting atoms (known as nuclear fission) produces heat. At most nuclear power plants, that heat is used to boil water, which produces steam. The steam then spins a giant turbine to create electricity.

Nuclear power is reliable, cost-effective, and doesn’t produce any climate-harming carbon emissions. It’s been used in the U.S. for decades, and today, nuclear power plants generate about 20% of the nation’s electricity.

The challenge: The average lifespan of a nuclear power plant is 35 years, and most of the plants in the U.S. were built between the 1970s and ’90s.

New facilities aren’t being built at the same pace old ones are retiring, though, because getting projects approved isn’t easy — nuclear power plants today tend to be massive facilities that cost $10 billion and take several years to build.

Why it matters: If another form of clean energy doesn’t fill the gap left by those old nuclear power plants, carbon-emitting sources, such as natural gas or coal, might.

Wind and solar are options, but nuclear power is more reliable and takes up less physical space. TerraPower has designed a new kind of nuclear reactor that could be built more quickly and cheaply than traditional plants.

The plant will serve as the first demonstration project for TerraPower’s tech.

The idea: TerraPower calls its technology Natrium, and it features a sodium-cooled fast reactor, which uses liquid salt as a coolant instead of water. The heat the plant produces is trapped in molten salt, which is stored in a giant tank.

That heat can then be tapped to spin a turbine and generate electricity whenever needed — it doesn’t have to be used right away if another source of cheaper or cleaner energy, such as solar or wind, is already meeting the grid’s demand.

https://bigthink.com/the-future/molten-salt-reactor-replace-coal/

Yeah, more future theory vs. present fact....let's just ignore what we don't like: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...en-t-sweating-should-we&p=4942677#post4942677

 

[Hawkeye10]

Says a joke pretending to be an informed commentator. Carlson has been fact checked into the joke that he is...throwing red meat to the willfully ignorant MAGA minions.

When you let power decide for you what is true and what is not true then you deserve every bit of the shit life you get.

The weak are meat and the strong eat.

CHUMP

 

[Taichiliberal]

maggot is smoking his sometime-maybe wait-for-the-glorious-future improbably awesome pipe-dream pipe.

The future is solar. The sun is all the power the planet needs. Chuck these miners off the roof. They can't even devise a decent battery.

Solar, wind, geo thermal....where it can be applied....it can be done, if we as a planet choose to.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Once again, you avoid admitting you were wrong in one of your accusations, much less acknowledging unflattering information on your orange faced god.

Your sentence here is an ignorant statement based on the hope that you won't live to see the coming dilemmas dealing with all that stock piled waste...not to mention the disasters of unplanned for floods, earthquakes, etc. Typical corporate wonk parroting. And then there's this:

William Sanjour had been a hazardous waste specialist at the EPA for 24 years when he took legal action against the agency in 1994 in order to protect his First Amendment right to free speech. Sanjour frequently spoke out about his deep concerns regarding hazardous waste problems at the US Department of Energy’s Hanford Waste Treatment Plant, a decommissioned nuclear weapons production complex. His wrongful termination settlement of $4.1 million is the largest known legal award paid to a whistleblower in the Energy Department’s vast nuclear waste cleanup program. Notably, he won a landmark lawsuit against the federal government which established the First Amendment rights of federal employees to blow the whistle on their employer.
https://whistleblower.org/

And this:

https://www.lutins.org/nukes.html#power

The waste can be stored or reprocessed safely. It is only scientific illiterates, like you, that fight what works because you haven't got a clue how it works.

Your quote proves that. Hanford is not a commercial power plant. Nor is it indicative of the commercial nuclear power industry. It was an early production plant for plutonium built during wartime without much regard to pollution but rather production and winning a war.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Once again, the wonk response: future theory vs. present day reality. Here's what you can't/won't deal with.....so spare us all YOUR "bs waste canard":

You're incredibly naive and uninformed when it comes to all things nuclear. I've learnt from experience that you just can't deal with the science calmly and logically, preferring instead to indulge in emotion laded psychobabble.

Note, dear reader, how this corporate wonk just ignores discussing in detail any item in the content of my posts and then LIES about it. Worse, the clown states I'm uninformed....after reading his links and seeing it's all still theory and drawing board proto-types. Sad. He keeps posting "theory" brought to us by the very same jokers who are telling us that current nuke power is safe, clean, etc.

My post proves otherwise....and that's just in the USA.

Someone needs to clue in old Primey that solar, geo thermal, wind require science as well...and they don't produce deadly waste that the company wonks have yet to develop a safe commercial way to decontaminate. Nope, just more drawing board theory and mishaps from the wealthy industrialists (this has been going on for YEARS, folks). And the band played on.

 

[cancel2 2022]

The waste can be stored or reprocessed safely. It is only scientific illiterates, like you, that fight what works because you haven't got a clue how it works.

Your quote proves that. Hanford is not a commercial power plant. Nor is it indicative of the commercial nuclear power industry. It was an early production plant for plutonium built during wartime without much regard to pollution but rather production and winning a war.

It would have been stored in Yucca Mountain by now if it wasn't for ignorant fools like TCL, Moonshi'ite and Harry Reid. The 'nuclear waste' issue would have been dealt with if it weren't for scientific illiterates with humanity degrees. You just cannot reason with these people, so I've giving up trying.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

It would stored in Yucca Mountain by now if it wasn't for ignorant fools like TCL and Harry Reid. The 'nuclear waste' issue would have been dealt with by now if it weren't for scientific illiterates with humanity degrees.
You just cannot reason with these people, so I've giving up trying.

Exactly. Safe, and efficient. It'd also take up less space than burying wind turbine blades that wear out...

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Note, dear reader, how this corporate wonk just ignores discussing in detail any item in the content of my posts and then LIES about it. Worse, the clown states I'm uninformed....after reading his links and seeing it's all still theory and drawing board proto-types. Sad. He keeps posting "theory" brought to us by the very same jokers who are telling us that current nuke power is safe, clean, etc.

My post proves otherwise....and that's just in the USA.

Someone needs to clue in old Primey that solar, geo thermal, wind require science as well...and they don't produce deadly waste that the company wonks have yet to develop a safe commercial way to decontaminate. Nope, just more drawing board theory and mishaps from the wealthy industrialists (this has been going on for YEARS, folks). And the band played on.

How much detail do you want to discuss here?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Note, dear reader, how this corporate wonk just ignores discussing in detail any item in the content of my posts and then LIES about it. Worse, the clown states I'm uninformed....after reading his links and seeing it's all still theory and drawing board proto-types. Sad. He keeps posting "theory" brought to us by the very same jokers who are telling us that current nuke power is safe, clean, etc.

My post proves otherwise....and that's just in the USA.

Someone needs to clue in old Primey that solar, geo thermal, wind require science as well...and they don't produce deadly waste that the company wonks have yet to develop a safe commercial way to decontaminate. Nope, just more drawing board theory and mishaps from the wealthy industrialists (this has been going on for YEARS, folks). And the band played on.

More of the same content free, emotion laded psychobabble I've learnt to expect from Titchy.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Once again, you avoid admitting you were wrong in one of your accusations, much less acknowledging unflattering information on your orange faced god.

Your sentence here is an ignorant statement based on the hope that you won't live to see the coming dilemmas dealing with all that stock piled waste...not to mention the disasters of unplanned for floods, earthquakes, etc. Typical corporate wonk parroting. And then there's this:

William Sanjour had been a hazardous waste specialist at the EPA for 24 years when he took legal action against the agency in 1994 in order to protect his First Amendment right to free speech. Sanjour frequently spoke out about his deep concerns regarding hazardous waste problems at the US Department of Energy’s Hanford Waste Treatment Plant, a decommissioned nuclear weapons production complex. His wrongful termination settlement of $4.1 million is the largest known legal award paid to a whistleblower in the Energy Department’s vast nuclear waste cleanup program. Notably, he won a landmark lawsuit against the federal government which established the First Amendment rights of federal employees to blow the whistle on their employer.
https://whistleblower.org/

And this:

https://www.lutins.org/nukes.html#power

The waste can be stored or reprocessed safely. It is only scientific illiterates, like you, that fight what works because you haven't got a clue how it works.

Your quote proves that. Hanford is not a commercial power plant. Nor is it indicative of the commercial nuclear power industry. It was an early production plant for plutonium built during wartime without much regard to pollution but rather production and winning a war.

Really? Prove it! Link to the article that shows nuke waste being safely reprocessed. If that is the case, why isn't this process international? I haven't read such in all these years. So keep in mind, theory is NOT reality to application. So either put up or shut up.

I swear you either the dumbest propagandist or you have the worst reading comprehension I've ever seen. Nowhere in my quote does it label Hanford as a commercial plant, and it states the decommissioned status of nuke weapons production. So you lied....a lie trying to what, insinuated that commercial plants handle it better? This was in 1994, genius. That means the plant was STILL treating waste from nuke plants and such. Got that bunky?

The point was that you had to have a whistle blower show willfully ignorant louts like you that things are NOT all hunky dory. That you stupidly try to BS past this is just insipid stubbornness on your part. I doubt you even read the material in the second link provided. Carry on.

 

[cancel2 2022]

How much detail do you want to discuss here?

None, going by his past record. But do go ahead and give him a good mauling.

 

[McRocket]

It is likely putting money in Joke and the Bagman Biden's pockets. So, that's the reason they're for starting World War 3.

Surely you do not think all the neocons in America vote Democrat?

I agree Biden is almost certainly pushing this for a distraction. And it is nonsense.

But the neocons and the Military Industrial Complex - most of whom are almost certainly on the right - are salivating at the possibility as well.

Led by the Neo-con poster boy - John Bolton.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Note, dear reader, how this corporate wonk just ignores discussing in detail any item in the content of my posts and then LIES about it. Worse, the clown states I'm uninformed....after reading his links and seeing it's all still theory and drawing board proto-types. Sad. He keeps posting "theory" brought to us by the very same jokers who are telling us that current nuke power is safe, clean, etc.

My post proves otherwise....and that's just in the USA.

Someone needs to clue in old Primey that solar, geo thermal, wind require science as well...and they don't produce deadly waste that the company wonks have yet to develop a safe commercial way to decontaminate. Nope, just more drawing board theory and mishaps from the wealthy industrialists (this has been going on for YEARS, folks). And the band played on.

More of the same content free, emotion laded psychobabble I learnt to expect from Titchy.

Only an insipidly stubborn fool would try and deny the chronology of the posts. Seems you fit the bill, as no information provided can waver your willful ignorance.
Now run-a-long and parrot your little attempts at insult and slander to your hearts content. You'll be all tuckered out soon and sleep well tonight.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Really? Prove it! Link to the article that shows nuke waste being safely reprocessed. If that is the case, why isn't this process international? I haven't read such in all these years. So keep in mind, theory is NOT reality to application. So either put up or shut up.

I swear you either the dumbest propagandist or you have the worst reading comprehension I've ever seen. Nowhere in my quote does it label Hanford as a commercial plant, and it states the decommissioned status of nuke weapons production. So you lied....a lie trying to what, insinuated that commercial plants handle it better? This was in 1994, genius. That means the plant was STILL treating waste from nuke plants and such. Got that bunky?

The point was that you had to have a whistle blower show willfully ignorant louts like you that things are NOT all hunky dory. That you stupidly try to BS past this is just insipid stubbornness on your part. I doubt you even read the material in the second link provided. Carry on.

Stupid bugger has never heard of vitrification, why am I not surprised?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Okay dear readers; T.A. injected nuke power into a discussion about potential war in the Ukraine...and like flies to manure the nuke corporate wonks were all over it, parroting the SOS I've read from them for YEARS on two different discussion boards. They'll never change.

So, does anyone want to get back on track about the OP?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Really? Prove it! Link to the article that shows nuke waste being safely reprocessed. If that is the case, why isn't this process international? I haven't read such in all these years. So keep in mind, theory is NOT reality to application. So either put up or shut up.

Well, unlike your ill-informed opinion, France for one is already doing this:

https://www.stimson.org/2021/visit-...ch,for SNF. What is Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF)?
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-the-nuclear-fuel-cycle-what-can-oui-learn
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE_1587_web.pdf

The entirety of France's nuclear waste at the moment amounts to an approximate cube the size, height, and length, of a football field. It'd all fit inside a super Walmart.
France is reprocessing their waste successfully and they're storing the unusable parts in a facility like Yucca Mountain. It's only political opposition by idiots who know nothing about science--like you--that keep it from happening here.

I swear you either the dumbest propagandist or you have the worst reading comprehension I've ever seen. Nowhere in my quote does it label Hanford as a commercial plant, and it states the decommissioned status of nuke weapons production. So you lied....a lie trying to what, insinuated that commercial plants handle it better? This was in 1994, genius. That means the plant was STILL treating waste from nuke plants and such. Got that bunky?

Yes, commercial plants do much better than Hanford. Other than that, you bring out the usual insults ("you lie!") even as you have no clue whatsoever about what you are talking about.

https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage.html
https://www.iaea.org/publications/13516/storage-of-spent-nuclear-fuel

The point was that you had to have a whistle blower show willfully ignorant louts like you that things are NOT all hunky dory. That you stupidly try to BS past this is just insipid stubbornness on your part. I doubt you even read the material in the second link provided. Carry on.

Okay, the EPA is incompetent when they are the ones doing things. On that I can agree. Their handling of the Goldking mine disaster is a perfect example of that incompetence. Government oversight of private enterprise has its value as does public oversight. That's what the commercial nuclear industry has. They handle their own waste, not incompetent government bureaucrats.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Okay dear readers; T.A. injected nuke power into a discussion about potential war in the Ukraine...and like flies to manure the nuke corporate wonks were all over it, parroting the SOS I've read from them for YEARS on two different discussion boards. They'll never change.

So, does anyone want to get back on track about the OP?

Ah, the change the subject ploy? Why not both?