Discendo Vox posted:

Raenir Salazar posted:

Okay... Well first of all, I think its clear I was giving your acquaintances the benefit of the doubt and assuming what you relayed is 100% accurate; but if we're going to be pulling teeth here for no reason at all; (1) Anecdotal evidence is at best a kind of hearsay which is at best a 'kind of evidence'; (2) I have no evidence that what you said is an accurate representation of what your friends said, or what they believe; it could've been garbled in a game of telephone. (3) Even if what you conveyed was an accurate word for word transcription it still might not be an accurate representation of what they believe in their heart of hearts, so I feel it is perfectly reasonable for me to for the purposes of conversation and for the sake of the argument, the best possible interpretation benefit of the doubt version of the argument your friends are actually making. Because that's more interesting to discuss than the worst version of what they're saying.

Potato Salad posted:

I don't even know if an experienced parody author could do a better job than this.

Maybe Terry Pratchett could've pulled this off.

Potato Salad posted:

Are there actually any political movements that target medical isotope generation and/or use in their platform? I ask out of genuine fascination.

Raenir Salazar posted:

There's a quantum entanglement joke in there somewhere but I'm uncertain until someone makes it.

Raenir Salazar posted:

Maybe there's just a complete breakdown in the communication here, but I don't think this post of yours does anything to help resolve it. Is there something about what I'm saying you're actually either (a) Not sure what I mean, not in my last post in particular but during this conversation overall; in which case can you ask me to clarify what specifically you're not understanding; or (b) Is there something specifically that you disagree with, in which case can you first at least clarify what you think my position is that you disagree with so I can clarify if that was my meaning or not. Or (c) I guess we could just drop it if trying to figure out what we're actually saying to each other is just intractible at this point?

Because I don't think either of us really has any idea of what's happening at this point if this is what it comes down to?

MooselanderII posted:

*points at your custom avatar*

His Divine Shadow posted:

Paywall but the blurb says it, 5 reactors back online in France this week. Hopefully things continues at this pace:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/frances-restart-of-nuclear-reactors-eases-blackout-fears-11671102996

devicenull posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38

Is this actually legit?

in a well actually posted:

Maybe? Somebody did a writeup here or in the nuclear reactor thread in the last few pages that discussed Helion.

All fusion news coverage is wildly overstated so grain of salt, etc.

cant cook creole bream posted:

Helion has a really cool reactor design. Basically, they use two magnetic fields to hyper-accelerate deuterium towards the middle chamber from both sides. In there the giant positive charge of those atom cores pushes them back away from each other and the magnets can actually slow the atoms on the way back. By stealing the kinetic energy those magnets produce electricity. The company claims that this whole process is 95% effective, i.e. that even if there's no fusion at all, you return 95 percent of the electric energy you put in to make those magnets squeeze the atoms in the first place. So in theory you only need to produce a little amount of extra energy from fusion to get an actual positive return there. So if you produce more than 5% of your input energy as fusion energy you already made an energy profit. The concept is also a bit more complicated than that, since it is a fuel cycle which ultimately should fuse helium 3 with deuterium to produce (positively charged) helium. those fast helium cores can also be captured by magnets. Basically the idea is that such a reactor doesn't even heat water to turn turbines but rather returns direct electricity.
I want that to succeed, but it sounds too good to be true. Especially since the helium 3 is earned from the fuel cycle, so you basically only need deuterium (not even tritium).
They claim that their coming reactor version will do a tiny amount of net electricity in 2024, which sounds like it's relatively easy to verify or falsify.
It would be cool if that actually turns out to be successful, but I'm not holding my breath.

EoRaptor posted:

Re: Helion

They talk about the plans for generating energy, but I'm very much in the 'until I see it' boat. The timing of this smells of building up visibility/value for a funding round.

Most importantly, we should be building what we can (solar, wind, even crappy battery storage) not waiting for some future miracle cure for our climate related energy ills.

Raenir Salazar posted:

We should be funding *everything* and seeing what sticks in a sustained fashion. Fusion presents various advantages over Fission, which has advantages over Natural Gas and other forms of baseline power generation, it arguably even has advantages over hydro; you'd need only a fraction of the safety regulations for fusion compared to fission. It's also great for space travel/exploration/science; fission reactors also provide various medical and other benefits, maybe fusion can as well.

Electric Wrigglies posted:

Hydro is one of the things that needs to go the way of the dodo, we only tolerate it out of lack of something remotely equivalent in properties (dispatchable, cheap, low carbon, non-nuclear power). It wrecks a lot of the environment (both within the basin and in terms of changed ecosystems of the entire river system) and is orders of magnitude less safe than fission nuclear.

Electric Wrigglies posted:

Hydro is one of the things that needs to go the way of the dodo, we only tolerate it out of lack of something remotely equivalent in properties (dispatchable, cheap, low carbon, non-nuclear power). It wrecks a lot of the environment (both within the basin and in terms of changed ecosystems of the entire river system) and is orders of magnitude less safe than fission nuclear.

I'm not sure how fusion will end up being that much better unless we have need for absolutely humongous point sources of power or unless there is a way that the irradiated cladding and the like only contain radioactive particles with very short (single digit seconds) or very long (1k's of years) half-lives.

Agreed that funding multiple avenues of energy generation and not just what works now. If we only funded what already worked, we would have abandoned a lot of large scale solar and wind funding (and requisite battery) for nuclear two decades ago!

quote:

Yellowhammer News and Alabama Political Reporter offer clashing ideologies - one hardline conservative, the other centrist - and appear simply to be competitors. Owners of the two sites separately defend their coverage, saying they are independent news outlets.

In reality, they are among six news outlets across Alabama and Florida with financial connections to the consulting firm Matrix LLC, a joint investigation by Floodlight and NPR finds. The firm, based in Montgomery, Alabama, has boasted clients including Alabama Power and another major U.S. utility, Florida Power & Light.

In addition to Yellowhammer and The Alabama Political reporter, the sites include Alabama Today, The Capitolist, Florida Politics and the now-defunct Sunshine State News.

...

In Alabama and Florida, Matrix sought to ensure much coverage was secretly driven by the priorities of its clients. Payments flowed as the utilities in Florida and Alabama fought efforts to incorporate more clean energy in electric grids — a fight they are still waging.

For this investigation, Floodlight and NPR drew upon hundreds of internal Matrix documents and public records, more than three dozen interviews, a review of social media postings, and an original analysis of coverage.

Those accounts reflect a complex web of financial links, in which the six outlets collectively received, at minimum, $900,000 from Matrix, its clients, and associated entities between 2013 and 2020.

All of the media organizations deny their coverage was shaped by those payments and deny they acted unethically.

The founder of Matrix, Joe Perkins, says the firm paid news sites only for advertising and other run-of-the-mill services for its clients. He also denies Matrix paid anything at all to two of the sites. Beyond that, Perkins has consistently called the firm's former CEO, Jeff Pitts, a "rogue employee" and, in a lawsuit, alleges Matrix is not responsible because the former executive acted without his knowledge or his firm's consent. Pitts did not respond to several detailed requests for comment. In court filings, Pitts says Perkins knew everything–and he accused Perkins of wrongdoing.

They also cast blame on one another over a series of recent scandals. Matrix recently made headlines for surveillance of a power company CEO and a journalist who wrote critically about Florida Power & Light's business plans. Matrix has also been accused of seeking to influence ballot initiatives on clean energy and offering a lucrative job to a public official in Jacksonville to induce him to resign. Florida Power & Light did not respond to a detailed list of questions, and an executive for the company declined to address them in a phone call.

...
Coverage of Matrix's power company clients at the six news sites ebbed and surged around election seasons and other key inflection points. For example, Sunshine State News emerged when Sen. Rick Scott, a consistent ally of Florida Power & Light, was governor of Florida and maintained warm ties with him. Matrix records show the firm paid the site at least $180,000. It shuttered a year after he won election to the U.S. Senate. A former Scott aide also founded The Capitolist, based in Tallahassee.

Additionally, Matrix's clients took a strong interest in who wrote the laws and enforced the regulations. Last year, Florida Power & Light wrote a bill that was passed by the Florida Legislature and that would have gutted the ability of homeowners to make money off solar panels. Gov. Ron DeSantis ultimately vetoed it.

One state away, Alabama Power runs and owns a coal-fired power plant that is the largest single source of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.

An analysis by Floodlight and NPR of the three Alabama news sites with links to Matrix finds overwhelmingly positive coverage of Alabama Power. The review looked at articles on each site that contained the phrase "Alabama Power" and found that the vast majority of pieces either were positive or appeared to mirror a news release by the utility.

In interviews, two former reporters at the Alabama Political Reporter recounted episodes in which articles about Alabama Power received intense and unusual scrutiny from editors. In one case, the story was never published. Its proprietor denies any such influence on the site.

Together, Alabama Power and Florida Power & Light keep the lights on for nearly 7.5 million businesses and households. Since consumers' payments contribute to much of the two utilities' profits, much of the money that the companies spend effectively derives from consumers' bills.

...

Matrix founder Joe Perkins has long held an interest in the power of the media. As a doctoral student at the University of Alabama, he wrote his thesis about a specific quandary: How can journalists' choice of sources and anecdotes affect public sentiment?

"When a minority opinion gains access to the news media repeatedly through various techniques to make its point, it may be perceived as more widespread and pervasive than it actually is," he wrote in his 73-page paper.

He then put his research to use, building up Matrix.

In the early days, Matrix quietly sought to influence decisions over matters like who was eligible to win contracts with the Alabama teachers pension fund. The firm eventually established a presence in 10 states.

quote:

https://svenska.yle.fi/a/7-10025040

Due to the war in Ukraine and the non-delivery of Russian gas, Germany is again producing more electricity with lignite. In order to extract more coal for the power plants, it now looks as if the symbolically important town of Lützerath for the climate movement will be destroyed.

Police drones hover over the disputed village of Lützerath. For several hours it circles above the treetops and rooftops to collect images of the small town, which today is primarily a camp for visiting climate activists.

That the police are making plans on how to get rid of the activists, who have entrenched themselves in the area, also became clear when a larger inspection was carried out in Lützerath some time ago. Around the same time, the electricity to the village was cut.

Among the activists, it is assumed that the police will try to empty the village at some stage in January.

Since December 20th, it is forbidden to stay in the resort and from January 10th, people may begin to be removed from Lützerath.

- I expect that the police will come at some stage to try to empty the treehouses that have been built, so that you can start felling the trees. We expect that it will certainly be about a force of at least a thousand police officers, says Marina Scheidler from the organization Alle Dörfer Bleiben.

Hoping for more outside help
When you walk around the village, you can see that preparations have been made on the part of the activists as well.

The treetops and huts up there are strewn with ropes so that you can tie yourself up or move to another tree when the police come. Barricades have been built and in several places paving stones are also completely stacked.

- I don't know how much I should say about what is planned, but compared to previous occupations, we also have houses here that we can entrench ourselves in, so it will probably be more difficult for them to remove us, says the activist Feluda.

What the activists now intend to do in Lützerath was already done successfully in the forest Hambacher Forst a few years ago.

- But whether we will really succeed in saving the village will probably be determined mainly by whether the pressure and the prosthesis from the outside will be greater, Feluda continues.

Temporary comeback for coal leads to greater emissions

Lützerath's importance became even greater during the autumn through an agreement between the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, the German Ministry of Economy and the energy company RWE.

According to the agreement, RWE commits to renouncing lignite until the year 2030, and this also means that five other threatened villages will be saved.

The only village that is still planned to end up under the shovel is precisely Lützerath.

- The agreement was marketed as a good thing in terms of climate protection, but investigations show that this accelerated phase-out plan does not lead to reduced emissions at all, says Marina Scheidler.

The agreement gives RWE the opportunity to burn more lignite now in the next few years than it would have done in the 2030s according to the original plan.

At the same time, the report states that the lignite under Lützerath will hardly ever be needed.

The need for more coal, i.e. both domestic lignite and imported hard coal, is of course justified and explained by the ongoing war in Ukraine and the fact that instead of Russian gas, one must resort to other means to produce electricity.

During the autumn and the beginning of winter, seven major German coal-fired power plants have been put back into operation or increased production. This includes, among other things, three units at two separate lignite power plants next to the Garzweiler open-pit mine, which is now in the process of swallowing up Lützerath.

It is estimated that the forced reactivation of coal-fired power plants may increase German carbon dioxide emissions by around 60 million tons until, as planned, by 2038 at the latest, coal is completely phased out.

Anger and disappointment with the Greens

In any case, the new plans for coal power have led to a deep split between the climate activists in Lützerath and the Greens in Germany.

In the state government of North Rhine-Westphalia, the Greens were involved in negotiating the agreement with RWE, and in Berlin it is the Green Economy Minister Robert Habeck who has made the decision that instead of gas, coal power must be used.

- The disappointment cannot be described in words. And it is not only disappointment but also anger, says the activist Feluda.

- I am not disappointed myself, just angry. They could have used their position of power in a different way, but on the other hand, this was also expected. Like all other parties, the Greens also do not keep what they promise, says activist Mara Sauer.

The fact is, however, that Germany currently does not have many other options than to resort to coal power.

Expanding the renewable forms of energy, as the government plans, will require time and also during these years the electricity supply must be secured.

The government has indeed decided that the remaining three nuclear reactors will continue to produce electricity over the winter, but after that it is definitely over. Viewed in the big picture, nuclear power's role is already almost marginal.

- Of course, I hope that there will be a change, may it be nuclear power or renewable energy. Everything is better than lignite, says activist Feluda.

- Going back to nuclear power is something I will not discuss as long as we in Germany do not discuss how we can reduce electricity consumption, says Mara Sauer. According to her, it is mainly in industry that these savings must take place.

Marina Scheidler, whom I met in Lützerath already this spring, is currently more doubtful about whether the village really can be saved anymore.

- I don't think any political decisions will save Lützerath. My hopes are that we will get so many people here that it will be impossible to destroy the village, says Scheidler.

quote:

- Going back to nuclear power is something I will not discuss as long as we in Germany do not discuss how we can reduce electricity consumption, says Mara Sauer. According to her, it is mainly in industry that these savings must take place.

His Divine Shadow posted:

Germans angry and dissapointed at getting what they voted for, google translated.

Oh dear, oh well, so sad.

mobby_6kl posted:

Lol at that nuclear quote. Supposedly they've earmarked almost half a trillion EUR for various bailouts and subsidies: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germanys-half-a-trillion-dollar-energy-bazooka-may-not-be-enough-2022-12-15/

Even at the rates of the disaster of a project that was OL3, that would've been enough to build around 40 1.6GW units like that, assuming nobody eventually figures out how to make them more effectively. That would cover electricity needs entirely.

VictualSquid posted:

At the time of the last election the competing proposal was to take all that money and pay it directly to the investment banks, the true victims. And under no circumstances ever to invest into any infrastructure, including power plants.

The movement withing the green party towards accepting nuclear is more likely to lead to a new NPP, then the movement within the CDU against austerity.

Electric Wrigglies posted:

I was looking at the French power production and now they are back to exporting power and curtailing nuclear production. I assume a lot of coal power in Germany is online though still, what mechanisms are there to curtail cross boarder coal generation prior to nuclear generation? I mean other than physical interconnectors.

Electric Wrigglies posted:

I was looking at the French power production and now they are back to exporting power and curtailing nuclear production. I assume a lot of coal power in Germany is online though still, what mechanisms are there to curtail cross boarder coal generation prior to nuclear generation? I mean other than physical interconnectors.

ok, there is definitely an eat the rich argument to be made there but plans on eating the rich don't have to stop us insisting the greens get on board for the climate, considering they are the ones that self-declare as the only people that care.

Also, if nuclear was not at such risk activism wise, I am sure CDU types would be all on board. They are investments with a massive barrier of entry of needing large capital. You try and find somewhere to park 500 billion euros with a 5 or 10% return on investment for 60 years.