Jump to content

Sensory overload


Recommended Posts

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change. 

I really need to stop listening to NPR. It's a one and a half hour ride to work and a 2-hour ride home. I listen because they have excellent traffic reports.

 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change. 

I really need to stop listening to NPR. It's a one and a half hour ride to work and a 2-hour ride home. I listen because they have excellent traffic reports.

 

Spotify, rock out to your favorite music. By the way, that's a long trip for work man, dang! 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change. 

I really need to stop listening to NPR. It's a one and a half hour ride to work and a 2-hour ride home. I listen because they have excellent traffic reports.

 

Get an Audible subscription and listen to books. Of course there are no traffic reports on Audible, but ...

Link to comment
2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Spotify, rock out to your favorite music. By the way, that's a long trip for work man, dang! 

Yeah it started out a 30 mile trip with a border crossing. A year ago today we escaped AK- 47 alley after hauling out 140 truck loads of sand. No wonder the rent was so cheap. 

Anyways we moved but I still have the same job.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)

Speaking of climate change has anyone checked out the new reactors by X- energy? They are supposed to be impossible to melt down. They are small 80MWe generators. You can put 4 together to make 320 MWe gensets. I hope they catch on. Nuclear power is the only way to get rid of greenhouse gases. 

Another one I heard of runs on the waste from the big reactors. 

Edited by rodheadlee
Link to comment
5 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Speaking of climate change has anyone checked out the new reactors by X- energy? They are supposed to be impossible to melt down. They are small 80MWe generators. You can put 4 together to make 32 MWe gensets. I hope they catch on. Nuclear power is the only way to get rid of greenhouse gases. 

Another one I heard of runs on the waste from the big reactors. 

Have they built it or are they still in design stage.  I can’t tell…

https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/X-energy-formally-begins-SMR-partnership-with-DOE

Link to comment

Before we make a big move to embrace more nuclear power we need to come up with a long-term solution for the disposal of nuclear waste.

We have about 80,000 metric tons of the stuff and it is a little scary where it all is right now. With the Yucca Mountain site in perpetual limbo due to political opposition and endless lawsuits a new method is needed. Once that plan is in place we then definitely should increase nuclear power generation.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Before we make a big move to embrace more nuclear power we need to come up with a long-term solution for the disposal of nuclear waste.

We have about 80,000 metric tons of the stuff and it is a little scary where it all is right now. With the Yucca Mountain site in perpetual limbo due to political opposition and endless lawsuits a new method is needed. Once that plan is in place we then definitely should increase nuclear power generation.

The reactor the other group that got funded by the DOE,  runs on that waste. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, rodheadlee said:

The reactor the other group that got funded by the DOE,  runs on that waste. 

Then we need a reactor that runs on the waste of that plant or a place to put said waste.

I am not saying that this is bad. It is fantastic to be able to use the waste but there will still be waste even if we do not need to deal with the volume the plants from the 60s and 70s put out.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Then we need a reactor that runs on the waste of that plant or a place to put said waste.

I am not saying that this is bad. It is fantastic to be able to use the waste but there will still be waste even if we do not need to deal with the volume the plants from the 60s and 70s put out.

X energy runs  on triso x fuel kernels. Little to no waste. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

X energy runs  on triso x fuel kernels. Little to no waste. 

Even if that is true and I am not convinced of that entirely. The pebbles used would not afterwards be ‘safe’ to be stored anywhere unless I am missing something. Unless there has been an advancement in enrichment I missed you also have to deal with the depleted uranium created in the enrichment process to create the fuel.

Link to comment
45 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Even if that is true and I am not convinced of that entirely. The pebbles used would not afterwards be ‘safe’ to be stored anywhere unless I am missing something. Unless there has been an advancement in enrichment I missed you also have to deal with the depleted uranium created in the enrichment process to create the fuel.

You're missing something. 

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

You're missing something. 

And that is? These reactors use HALEU fuel. The uranium needed is enriched beyond the level of what is used in conventional nuclear reactors. Most of those use fuel around the 5% range. They are talking about 20% with this. Is there a new enrichment procedure?

If anyone reading this is having flashbacks to talks about Iran enriching uranium here is a basic reference. The minimum to build a nuclear weapon is only about 20% but it would have to be very very big. Most nuclear arsenals use uranium enriched to around 90%. To build a weapon out of 20% uranium means it would be about as heavy as an elephant. Not ideal.

Side-note: While suitcase nukes are a theoretical possibility they are practically useless. They would cost a fortune to make and wouldn’t last long if they were built.

That being said allowing rogue states to have the tech to enrich uranium to 20% is probably not good.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

And that is? These reactors use HALEU fuel. The uranium needed is enriched beyond the level of what is used in conventional nuclear reactors. Most of those use fuel around the 5% range. They are talking about 20% with this. Is there a new enrichment procedure?

If anyone reading this is having flashbacks to talks about Iran enriching uranium here is a basic reference. The minimum to build a nuclear weapon is only about 20% but it would have to be very very big. Most nuclear arsenals use uranium enriched to around 90%. To build a weapon out of 20% uranium means it would be about as heavy as an elephant. Not ideal.

Side-note: While suitcase nukes are a theoretical possibility they are practically useless. They would cost a fortune to make and wouldn’t last long if they were built.

That being said allowing rogue states to have the tech to enrich uranium to 20% is probably not good.

https://x-energy.com/fuel/triso-x

Link to comment
5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Before we make a big move to embrace more nuclear power we need to come up with a long-term solution for the disposal of nuclear waste.

We have about 80,000 metric tons of the stuff and it is a little scary where it all is right now. With the Yucca Mountain site in perpetual limbo due to political opposition and endless lawsuits a new method is needed. Once that plan is in place we then definitely should increase nuclear power generation.

This isn't what we are doing with solar. Not saying we should stop solar or dive head first into nuclear, but just know there is an obscene amount of solar being installed and no reliable way (at least not yet) to recycle the toxic chemicals and metals in 30 years. There are companies working on it now, but nothing is done yet.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

That doesn’t answer the question. It explains a bit of how it is manufactured but one of the ‘ingredients’ is uranium and it uses uranium enriched to about 20%. You don’t find that uranium at that level in nature. It has to be processed (usually by centrifuge) and the waste material is depleted uranium.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Fether said:

This isn't what we are doing with solar. Not saying we should stop solar or dive head first into nuclear, but just know there is an obscene amount of solar being installed and no reliable way (at least not yet) to recycle the toxic chemicals and metals in 30 years. There are companies working on it now, but nothing is done yet.

True, solar panel recycling probably needs to be subsidized. It is not economically viable but some of it is reusable and the heavy metals in those things are not the kinds of things you want in the ground water.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, The Nehor said:

That doesn’t answer the question. It explains a bit of how it is manufactured but one of the ‘ingredients’ is uranium and it uses uranium enriched to about 20%. You don’t find that uranium at that level in nature. It has to be processed (usually by centrifuge) and the waste material is depleted uranium.

Okay obviously it's above my education level. One thing I can tell you from experience you will need to supplement wind and solar with something else 25% of the time. We get away with 12% of the time on our boat but your average citizen isn't going to be power conscience.

Edited by rodheadlee
Link to comment
On 7/3/2021 at 2:40 PM, rodheadlee said:

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change 

LGBTQ, racism, climate change. 

I really need to stop listening to NPR. It's a one and a half hour ride to work and a 2-hour ride home. I listen because they have excellent traffic reports.

 

Get audiobooks, that's what I do.

On 7/3/2021 at 2:55 PM, AtlanticMike said:

Spotify, rock out to your favorite music. By the way, that's a long trip for work man, dang! 

Or this.  Btw 2 hours is standard for a lot of people nowadays, sucks I know

Link to comment
On 7/3/2021 at 2:00 PM, Stargazer said:

Get an Audible subscription and listen to books. Of course there are no traffic reports on Audible, but ...

You can also see if your library uses the overdrive or libby apps and find audiobooks there.  I prefer the libby app.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...