|
https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1189229024951881728
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:50 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/mowermanjimmy/status/1202917012932042752
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
Well that's real depressing
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mackaymiller/status/1205501040331829254
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
What does that mean in regular person terms?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Investors believed that Ur-Socialist Corbyn would have nationalized British energy utilities in the process of reversing Thatcherism. But then latest election results came in, and Labour lost hard. Hard enough that Corbyn practically has to resign from Labour leadership. And in response, the stock prices of these utilities immediately went up by ~7%. Thus, investors believe that removing the risk of Corbyn nationalization is worth ~7% of a stocks price.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
That seems... low?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
That's because the actual chance of Labour both winning the election and then managing to implement immediate guillotine socialism was very low and therefore largely baked into the stock price.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 18:53
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:I don't want to defend the guy because whatever point he may have been trying to make he clearly failed. What’s the comparison for construction/deployment time on these two scenarios?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
I recently visited the Cook Islands and heard from locals that they were going 100% renewables by the end of 2020: https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/2016/01/18/cook-islands-on-target-to-be-100-percent-renewable/#gref I spotted a Tesla Battery array at Rarotonga airport, and saw a few EV’s there and on Aitutaki. When you’re paying $13,000 for one shipping container and diesel is selling for $10/gal (or so) that makes sense. Also both islands are small (I biked around Aitutaki, 18 miles total), so low range EV’s will work. We had a 3 hour tour on Raro in an electric Tuk-Tuk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
Wouldn't EV submersibles be more appropriate for those locations given current trends?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 04:34
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:What’s the comparison for construction/deployment time on these two scenarios? thats kindof impossible to answer, its like a divide by zero error. there is not currently proven capacity of a private company to build a working commercial nuclear reactor in the united states. two are in progress, over budget and over deadline of course. conversely that's roughly the amount of wind that was installed in the us in 2018. I can't find good numbers for 2019, but if the curve and the projections from old articles are to be believed it should be double-ish. solar, that's about the amount that was installed in the us in 2019 (bit less). for batteries that volume hasn't been sold for grid use, probably only a tenth or so, but it is being manufactured now (for cars). essentially you have three things that are already proven, existing, working, happening, and winding their way down their cost curves vs one thing that is currently 0 for 31: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_renaissance_in_the_United_States the only way nuclear could possibly work is if the government does it, not the commercial sector. the only candidate that would even remotely consider such a government nationalization/de-privatization/sector-takeover is effectively anti-nuclear. there are no chess moves on the board that make nuclear work. it exists only in "tech blog guy" fantasies. unless you know of a pro-nuclear far-leftist (yang isnt even remotely close) that can get elected president by 2020 that i'm not aware of. hell i'll even give you 2024. StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Dec 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
THE BEATWEAVER posted:Wouldn't EV submersibles be more appropriate for those locations given current trends? Sadly, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2019 23:35
|
|
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/climate/methane-leak-satellite.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
Don't worry, these Natural Gas producers will self-regulate!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
Question. Can anyone explain why most governments and people are putting almost all their funding in a specific tokamak design for fusion research? Is that the only way the tech can work?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
there is so little funding and the problem is so hard to solve that they all had to pool their money and pick one plan A
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 01:48
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:Question. Can anyone explain why most governments and people are putting almost all their funding in a specific tokamak design for fusion research? Is that the only way the tech can work? In a very brief summary, Tokamak reactor designs are considered more reliably guaranteed than competing designs, because the problems with it are considered solvable and are largely within developed fields like materials science - rather than esoteric ones like experimental physics. A Tokamak reactor can hypothetically be built given enough time and research. Some of the other designs are less certain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
So this is like a "best shot - most feasable" scenario. Another question, why do they need 10 years between first plasma and actually starting to test D-T? I'm trying to read more on the matter but my poor comprehension skills fail me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 02:04
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:Question. Can anyone explain why most governments and people are putting almost all their funding in a specific tokamak design for fusion research? Is that the only way the tech can work? Scientific consensus that that's the approach most likely to pay off. (Narrator: It wouldn't.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
General fusion just got $65 million for their fusion research https://generalfusion.com/2019/12/general-fusion-closes-65m-of-series-e-financing/ IIRC their strategy involves using steam-driven pistons to go full jojo on a spinning vortex of molten lead
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
Sharing here as well since some posters here may have an interest in some DIY battery goodness: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3907260
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:thats kindof impossible to answer, its like a divide by zero error. there is not currently proven capacity of a private company to build a working commercial nuclear reactor in the united states. two are in progress, over budget and over deadline of course. In the USA, where anything beyond coal getting replaced by gas, a few reactors getting license extensions, and a modest amount of renewables being built backed by some neoliberal Numbers Fuckstein tax rebate is not happening anyway. In countries where the government isn't afraid to just invest in useful poo poo nuclear is being rolled out with much more reasonable time frames and prices.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 11:00
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Also centralisation is cool yo, at least to the city/county level where the local community can have a municipal reactor and avoid grid wide single points of failure without having to juggle a million random generators on every loving rooftop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 11:06
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:In countries where the government isn't afraid to just invest in useful poo poo nuclear is being rolled out with much more reasonable time frames and prices. suck my woke dick posted:Also centralisation is cool yo, at least to the city/county level where the local community can have a municipal reactor and avoid grid wide single points of failure without having to juggle a million random generators on every loving rooftop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:i'm not saying you're wrong, but it sure would be great if you had anything to back that up, because while the notion itself seems plausible, you in particular seem kindof... <see next bit> China has 47 reactors under construction, and France just announced they are expanding their nuclear fleet, currently their fleet accounts for 85% of their generation capacity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
thanks wikipedia the assertion that mattered there was "rolled out with much more reasonable time frames and prices" how is china's plan going? edit: doing my own reading, seems like the answer is "much better than in the US but still not good" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#Future_projects StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Dec 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:thanks wikipedia Pricing doesn't matter to the dead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:So this is like a "best shot - most feasable" scenario. Another question, why do they need 10 years between first plasma and actually starting to test D-T? I'm trying to read more on the matter but my poor comprehension skills fail me. Job security and a culture of extreme bureaucracy, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:thanks wikipedia Same in India. South Korea (notwithstanding dithering by the current administration) has been doing fairly well even on price, as is nuclear exporter #1 Russia. "Better than the US but still not good" seems to be the best decarbonisation we're getting outside of special cases though, so I'll take it and just ask for the non nuclear capable parts of the construction workforce to plop down some renewables in addition while the next nuclear capable people get trained. StabbinHobo posted:did you think that comparison meant that 10 houses would have 200MW solar arrays? No, but usually people talking about decentralisation are referring to individuals feeding in power from their piddly 3KW rooftop installation and helping to balance the grid with their basement full of batteries, not replacing 2x400MW coal generators with a cluster of 8x100MW solar farms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 10:24
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:Same in India. South Korea (notwithstanding dithering by the current administration) has been doing fairly well even on price, as is nuclear exporter #1 Russia. quote:No, but usually people talking about decentralisation are referring to individuals feeding in power from their piddly 3KW rooftop installation and helping to balance the grid with their basement full of batteries, not replacing 2x400MW coal generators with a cluster of 8x100MW solar farms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:more claims you didn't even coherently assert, let alone back up. which is now extra suspect on account of your last ones turning out wrong. The South Korea stuff is very well known and has been discussed several times itt (see eg here). The current government is nuclear skeptic (and largely got voted in due to the previous government having broken up amid scandals) but its attempt to put am anti nuclear policy in place has stalled out over public opinion actually becoming fairly positive on nuclear. Russia has gotten the plurality to majority of nuclear power reactor exports in recent years by being more competitive than western nations with its VVER. quote:oh cool so even though i was very detailed and specific in my post, that doesn't matter, because you're going to argue with some other phantom people in your head who "usually" say something neither I nor anyone else in the thread said. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Dec 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/6point626/status/1207628789380984833?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
This is bad but what is interesting is this - sort of - from one of the oil majors even it’s just a subsidiary. Paging MomJeans420, any idea what the hell went wrong?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:This is bad but what is interesting is this - sort of - from one of the oil majors even it’s just a subsidiary. Paging MomJeans420, any idea what the hell went wrong? "We object to regulation" - Natural Gas and Petroleum industry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:"We object to regulation" - Natural Gas and Petroleum industry. And? Every single industry objects to any regulation all the time. Too freaking bad. I’d bet $20 this kind of accident could have been prevented but it’s Ohio. I doubt the same thing would happen in California where they still frack it’s just called something entirely different and highly regulated. If you want some real environmental horrors look at the drilling operations in Asia, Russia and the Middle East. They’re blissfully unaware they’re spewing methane or simply don’t care.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:And? Every single industry objects to any regulation all the time. Too freaking bad. I’d bet $20 this kind of accident could have been prevented but it’s Ohio. Which is why arguing in support of expanding Natural Gas is a fools errand. But here you are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2019 15:39
|
|
|
LOL Germany. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-31/germany-s-nationalist-party-has-wind-industry-in-limbo
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Which is why arguing in support of expanding Natural Gas is a fools errand. Without Natural Gas you are either straight up burning oil, coal or you have brownouts. All of these things are even more catastrophic. In my opinion, the entire Oil and Gas Industry shouldn’t be regulated. It should be nationalized.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:50 |
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Without Natural Gas you are either straight up burning oil, coal or you have brownouts. All of these things are even more catastrophic. What it should be is abandoned as rapidly as it can be replaced. Methane Emissions are part of the problem, not a solution. StabbinHobo posted:people already answered but I like to use graphs/pictures whenever I can CH4 makes up 19% of atmospheric emissions. But effectively, its quadruple the greenhouse gas as CO2. Expanding Fracking and Drilling for more methane is not a viable option if we want to effectively address climate change. Period. End of story. No pragmatism here, your option is continue to make Greenhouse gas emissions climb through expanded drilling/methane leaks or address the global issue. Its not the middle. Not to mention what you are effectively adopting is a massive increase in drilling and fracking to meet the demand of coal. Which means more methane leaks, because these guys are never going to accept heavy regulation. Natural Gas is 30 years too late to be an effective solution. You are longing for a time long since passed. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Dec 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 19:55
|
|
