|
I don't want to defend the guy because whatever point he may have been trying to make he clearly failed. But on the topic, there is an argument to be made that building greater nuclear capacity, the way it could actually be done in reality today not your fantasy jerk off blog post version, would move both the electric grid and energy use in general in the "centralized" direction on a centralization/de-centralization axis. Meaning, if your typical D&D Grover-Tier-Electrical-Engineer got their way we'd immediately start building 2 - 4 reactor AP1000 (1600 really) plants, or something very similar. Pretty much the same thing China is doing. For rough numbers lets say a 3.3GW plant with a 90% capacity factor at $155/MWH LCOE, for "3GW". Whereas if you got that 3GW the other way it would look something like: - 10 x 300MW offshore wind farms with a 45% capacity factor - 10 x 200MW onshore wind farms with a 45% capacity factor - 10 x 200MW solar farms with a 29% capacity factor - 50 x 10MW l-io battery banks Roughly speaking, according to that Lazard report and EIA numbers, those two scenarios would cost about he same amount of money and produce the same amount of power reliably. However one involves siting a single nuclear plant, the other involves siting 30 wind and solar farms. So its a very stark difference in terms of "do you think the grid (or energy, or society) should be *more* centralized or less?" StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Dec 2, 2019 |
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:07 |
|
|
Centralization is a fine axis for an argument, stabbinhobo! Cost-benefits are a big question for nuclear rollouts, too! Those are unironically solid technical and financial questions that need good answers to start using nuclear to reverse climate change. You know what isn't? A millenia-long holistic analysis of race and systems of oppression.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
The guy basically spends all his time tweeting about how proud he is of having money and being a "venture capitalist" (though let's be real, anyone who needs a daily tweet promoting his VC brand probably isn't raking it in). Anything he says should probably be seen in that context, since he's hardly a progressive philosophy icon. Mostly his easily mockable post is just emblematic for all the stupid poo poo that stands in the way of any public project ever. A conversation about the various merits of centralized and decentralized power infrastructure would be a good one to have though. Kaal fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Dec 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Nuclear jobs: highly skilled and technical, pretty elitist Oil and gas: hires ex-felons but pays high salaries while operating in places with low cost of living Yep, I guess nuclear has to go for social justice
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:if your typical D&D Grover-Tier-Electrical-Engineer Haha this is pretty good
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
If we can’t move to carbon-free energy until we first solve all other identifiable problems, welp I guess we’re not going to move to carbon-free energy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 19:43
|
|
|
MomJeans420 posted:Nuclear jobs: highly skilled and technical, pretty elitist Why can't nuclear power plants hire ex-felons or operate in places with low cost of living? Like I get that ex-felons are less likely to have technical skills but it's not like you need a PhD to become an operator at a nuclear power plant. You probably need as much education to get hired as an operator at a natural gas power plant
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 20:05
|
|
|
My little old highschool diplom applied for work on the Bruce refurbishment but turned that poo poo down after thinking long and hard about wanting to do refurb work in an aging nuclear plant. Also I never want to spend any significant time in Ontario again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Solar farms don't take too much technical know-how to set up. You really only need electricians when it comes time to wire up the thing and install the transformers. Pays very well (if they are hired through the local union through a Construction Worker program) although not as much compared to an oil field job, but there's less environmental hazards, less poisoning, and easier hours. The only caveat is that the work isn't necessarily where you live. When I was out on solar construction sites, that project was typically the biggest thing to happen in that corner of the US in a long while. Construction workers were pulled straight out of Arby's, trained up, and was given the biggest check they had ever received within a week. Some of them were in tears.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Why can't nuclear power plants hire ex-felons or operate in places with low cost of living?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
Kaal posted:We can't solve climate justice without also resolving 1,500 years of colonial patriarchy I mean, that part probably will turn out to be true
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 12:12
|
|
|
Comrade Blyatlov posted:Haha this is pretty good Yeah it is. I think grover actually used to post in this thread too, although maybe I am imagining that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 13:34
|
|
|
Pander posted:To get unescorted access at a nuke plant, which is a typical requirement for a job there, you have to pass a security screening. It's nothing to do with technical skills, lots of no-college work at nuke plants (almost all of which are through contractors). This is true for renewables. A lot of sites are bought out by utilities that use the same security requirements. The hardest hurdle is the drug screening in these poor areas where the solar sites are being installed. Raising a construction force of 100+ in a town of 4000 that's been blasted by opioids is quite difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
Kunabomber posted:This is true for renewables. A lot of sites are bought out by utilities that use the same security requirements. Good God, why? There's like zero reason to have screening more stringent than any typical construction work for renewables.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
It is a corporate policy that clearly violates basic privacy rights. There we were, in the middle of nowhere with no running water, with a dude propping open a port-a-potty while the poor worker inside is trying to produce urine under pressure because of policy that requires all aspects of sample collection to be observed. We had some workers quit right then and there out of protest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Pander posted:Good God, why? There's like zero reason to have screening more stringent than any typical construction work for renewables. You can't install malware in a road overpass and you have unique ways to injure yourself or others on the job when handling electricity and with union benefits and future contract negotiations driven by those injuries. He was specifically talking about sites worked on by utilities, who probably go ahead and apply that sort of screening to everyone who works for them, even if they don't need Critical Infrastructure Protection clearances that specifically require drug and background screening. It would be awkward for them to apply for a transfer or promotion to a CIP position or more high risk substation construction/lineman job and belatedly learn about their drug, gambling, or wife beating habit. It's just efficient HR practice. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
To be clear, all workers were already screened at a clinic prior to hiring - once the utility bought out the project while it was still under construction, they rejected that procedure and required all workers to be screened on-site under observation. Edit: These guys were hired out of the local union hall so they were not direct employees of the utility. Kunabomber fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
Unless people are too high to do their job it shouldn't matter at all, hth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 20:01
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
suck my woke dick posted:Unless people are too high to do their job it shouldn't matter at all, hth. Unless people are planning to shoot coworkers it shouldn’t matter at all if they’re carrying at work, hth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
It's more like "don't carry at work, and also if you're a guntoucher in your free time, lol, don't even bother"
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
Random drug testing is illegal in Canada without extraordinary circumstance waivers from the government, which is how 45% of post-incident drug tests returned positive on my last wind project. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
Apparatchik Magnet posted:Unless people are planning to shoot coworkers it shouldn’t matter at all if they’re carrying at work, hth. Okay but these workers weren't carrying marijuana in their pockets so maybe rethink this profoundly stupid analogy that you've developed No one should give a poo poo if you're shooting targets at the range, no one should give a poo poo if you're getting high on your couch at home.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Okay but these workers weren't carrying marijuana in their pockets so maybe rethink this profoundly stupid analogy that you've developed I write the FAA about this all the time, leave those pilots alone. I realize goons are not generally overburdened with practical knowledge or decision-making skills, but consider the possibility that it's impractical to trust people prone to drug use to refrain from use during times when they put the public at risk or might cost their employer a poo poo load of money if they decide to just say gently caress it. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Apparatchik Magnet posted:I write the FAA about this all the time, leave those pilots alone. Do you also assume that everyone who has a beer or a glass of whiskey after work will get wasted on the job? Because by your framework you need to be constantly worried that over half the human race is about to get trashed and kill everyone. Your framework is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
Taffer posted:Do you also assume that everyone who has a beer or a glass of whiskey after work will get wasted on the job? Because by your framework you need to be constantly worried that over half the human race is about to get trashed and kill everyone. I encourage you to write to the FAA, the DoT, and the various states who mandate drug testing for employees in certain public trust positions and quit wasting your time on some dude on the internet. Revising OSHA regulations and various worker's comp laws to exclude from coverage and leave with sole legal liability those who test positive post-accident would also help to convince employers to forgo drug testing in situations where it is permitted but not mandatory. Be the change you want to see in the world. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Apparatchik Magnet posted:I write the FAA about this all the time, leave those pilots alone. Occasional drug and alcohol use at home is not the same as coming to work drunk and/or high. hth And stop it with this "hey go ahead and write to the FAA and DoT about it" deflecting bullshit when you're voluntarily spouting idiot logic that tries to justify those policies. Posters are calling you out for saying something profoundly stupid
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Occasional drug and alcohol use at home is not the same as coming to work drunk and/or high. hth Yes, I know that many posters are too stupid or ignorant to understand how adults with real responsibilities choose to manage risk and liability and are taking their frustrations out on me. I'm sure they'll feel better after they smoke a joint and play some more video games. Broke: Nuclear power is doomed by a coalition of fossil fuel lobbyists and misguided greens. Woke: Nuclear power is doomed by its refusal to hire people who indulge in recreational drugs to construct reactors. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Drug testing, no matter where it is, has never been about safety. A person who abuses any kind of mind-altering substance whether it is alcohol or drugs will be immediately apparent to anyone they work with, no testing is required. It is and always has been a policy of racist and classist exclusion, and your attempt to use bureaucratic policy to back up your bad argument is dumb and obvious. If you're going to argue in favor of mandatory drug testing then actually commit and argue for it instead of this half-rear end poo poo.Apparatchik Magnet posted:Broke: Nuclear power is doomed by a coalition of fossil fuel lobbyists and misguided greens. Nice strawman, literally nobody said this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
Kunabomber posted:The hardest hurdle is the drug screening in these poor areas where the solar sites are being installed. Raising a construction force of 100+ in a town of 4000 that's been blasted by opioids is quite difficult. True. I'm able to expand upon this, the US Department Of Energy has similar standards to the Department of Defense. Granted, it is not all positions but they will look into things from your financial history, relationship history along with your vices. Especially, if you have access to state secrets, valuable corporate, government research or a Nuclear Reactor. Citizenship is also a big freaking deal. I do agree thought it is really dumb to require morally pure folks to apply for these positions - personally I think some of this should fall under diversity and inclusion but YMMV - yet times are a changing. Maybe one day things will change. There are still a ton of government job that don't allow for people to smoke weed. Taffer posted:Drug testing, no matter where it is, has never been about safety. A person who abuses any kind of mind-altering substance whether it is alcohol or drugs will be immediately apparent to anyone they work with, no testing is required. It is and always has been a policy of racist and classist exclusion, and your attempt to use bureaucratic policy to back up your bad argument is dumb and obvious. If you're going to argue in favor of mandatory drug testing then actually commit and argue for it instead of this half-rear end poo poo. I don't know about you but I sure as hell do not want those operating nuclear power plants to be high on the job or vulnerable to blackmail.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
Taffer posted:A person who abuses any kind of mind-altering substance whether it is alcohol or drugs will be immediately apparent to anyone they work with, I mean you're dead wrong but don't let that stop you
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
Taffer posted:Drug testing, no matter where it is, has never been about safety. A person who abuses any kind of mind-altering substance whether it is alcohol or drugs will be immediately apparent to anyone they work with, no testing is required. It is and always has been a policy of racist and classist exclusion, and your attempt to use bureaucratic policy to back up your bad argument is dumb and obvious. If you're going to argue in favor of mandatory drug testing then actually commit and argue for it instead of this half-rear end poo poo. I can't even imagine being this sheltered. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
Apparatchik Magnet posted:Yes, I know that many posters are too stupid or ignorant to understand how adults with real responsibilities choose to manage risk and liability and are taking their frustrations out on me. I'm sure they'll feel better after they smoke a joint and play some more video games. You were the one who expressed that opinion. You stated this position as though it is yours, are you saying that it isn't? And if it isn't, then were you lying or just incompetent? And why are you trying to pretend like it makes sense to fire people for smoking weed but not for drinking beer? The fact of the matter is that risk management isn't the accurate justification for these kinds of policies, otherwise a whole host of far riskier behaviors would also be considered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
end of year update from bloomberg new-energy finance on li-ion prices: https://about.bnef.com/blog/battery-pack-prices-fall-as-market-ramps-up-with-market-average-at-156-kwh-in-2019/ quote:Battery Pack Prices Fall As Market Ramps Up With Market Average At $156/kWh In 2019 keep in mind teslas typically at least 10% ahead of the pack so if the market average is $154 now and $100 in 2024 then teslas likely to get there in ~2022. hey electric wriggles did you ever get battery quotes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:
Essentially "coke lunch breaks" didn't involve soda.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Such a cruel irony that someone who smokes a little bit of weed every night is going to test positive on a drug test for potentially weeks, whereas you can do coke all weekend and test clean pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
Pander posted:Don't talk to nuke plant employees from the 70s and 80s then. I've heard some stories from former operators. That was most of the 70s-80s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I don't know about you but I sure as hell do not want those operating nuclear power plants to be high on the job or vulnerable to blackmail. Pretty much no one in history has argued that it's fine for people to be high at work, at least if they're doing anything where a fuckup could have serious consequences. Obviously no one really cares if the pizza guy is high, and most of us pretty much expect it, but I think we all agree that our doctors, lawyers, grid operators, construction workers, etc. should be sober while doing their jobs. The point is that once they leave for the night, there is no good reason for it to be the government's or their employer's business what the gently caress they do from that moment until they arrive for their next shift. As long as they're sober and rested at that point, whatever recreational drugs they may choose to use on their own time are irrelevant. Companies that do the bare minimum amount of drug testing required by law and/or their insurers get a pass for doing the best the system allows, but there is nothing worth defending about drug testing in any scenario where the employee isn't reasonably suspected of being high on the job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
wolrah posted:but I think we all agree that our doctors, lawyers... should be sober while doing their jobs. I have really bad news for you
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 01:13
|
|
|
MomJeans420 posted:I have really bad news for you
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:07 |
|
|
To get off the Drug/Drink binge: https://twitter.com/Kaikenhuippu/status/1202211613442531330?s=20 Basically, there's evidence that the German Natural Gas producers pushed to hasten the nuclear closure to make a buck, and are now demanding to be included as an Energy Source under the EU AGW response plans, but they were excluded based on their emissions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 19:38
|
|
