|
This looks like it will be totally even handed and cover the actual risks and actual damages and lasting effects and not just trying to cash in on HBO's Chernobyl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAOIH8HRdDo
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
Dameius posted:This looks like it will be totally even handed and cover the actual risks and actual damages and lasting effects and not just trying to cash in on HBO's Chernobyl. Oh look its Nuclear fear mongering, yippee. I remember bringing up Three Mile Island in my Technology and Environment class and being told by a fellow student that Hershey's chocolate had been radioactive for years afterward from the fallout getting into cows. Which has so many problems it wasn't even worth discussing.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
Dameius posted:This looks like it will be totally even handed and cover the actual risks and actual damages and lasting effects and not just trying to cash in on HBO's Chernobyl. And nothing happened.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
SporkChan posted:Oh look its Nuclear fear mongering, yippee. "Most of that radioactivity came from humans burning coal. Next."
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:The "Baseload" issue is basically wrong and easily disputed, you shouldn't use it. Anything can meet baseload with enough energy storage. It doesn't matter that such storage is expensive and impractical. It's not a real technical issue. I'd disagree? Like the biggest argument against nuclear power, once the ATOMZ scare tactics are stripped away, is the capital investment challenges and economic risk. If we're going to argue that the incredible overbuild of energy storage (I'm picturing endless flywheels across the horizon or towers of Powerwall infernoing) is in any sense economically feasible or practicable, then fuckit, building out as many next-gen nuclear plants as we want should also be magically economically feasible and practicable.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 01:56
|
|
|
Pander posted:I'd disagree? Yeah, nuclear is a solved problem (although setting up the infrastructure at the pace required is not). Storage is most assuredly not for any reasonable cost / environmental impact (dams everywhere as long as they don't impact the environment). There is this expectation that batteries are going to do some sort of Moores law to make batteries comparable to hydro dam storage anytime soon. This has been implied since the late nineties as a reason nuclear is a waste of time. Also, there was some chat earlier about South Australia being mostly renewable but I think it kind went by without being mentioned that SA is very much linked into the Australian Eastern seaboard (mostly non-renewable) grid and hence stability, consumption of SA overgeneration and top up services are all there to support the huge renewable percentage of SA. Part of at least one of the state wide power failures the system suffered was because the grid connection to the out of state grid got blown over in a storm. If you removed the grid connections permanently, there would have to be a crash build out of non-renewable generation.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 08:11
|
|
|
Pander posted:I'd disagree? It inevitably gets interpreted in a technical sense as in it's technically not possible to provide baseload with renewables which is not true so now you have to waste time arguing about that which then ends up with an argument about the economics of doing it. You might as well skip that step and say it's not economical to provide baseload with renewables.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 08:36
|
|
|
Baseload with renewables using batteries also doesn't cover the material and land use issues of the storage tech, either. Even if it were free, hydro pumped storage takes up huge tracts of land and batteries are made out of materials that are truly awful both to mine and to manufacture. Look up Baotou if you'd like to find out where rare earth minerals come from. Mining Uranium isn't a clean or easy process, but it's a lot better than that - and nuclear power leads every practical form of generation in terms of land use too.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 09:52
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:theyre chocolate tastes like vomit. next. also I loving love ifuckinglove types kramering into subjects their tiny attention spans just learned(or in this case from the HBO doc, re-remembered)
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/markets/status/1521570590108254208?s=20&t=DM-kGhwo06H16NJJcbHzUg
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 01:02
|
|
|
Would this be an appropriate venue to ask about hydrogen-based steel manufacturing? It got coverage in the latest TIME, and I can't tell if it's just an ad for the company profiled or if it has real potential.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 01:42
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Would this be an appropriate venue to ask about hydrogen-based steel manufacturing? It got coverage in the latest TIME, and I can't tell if it's just an ad for the company profiled or if it has real potential. Where does the hydrogen come from?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 01:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Would this be an appropriate venue to ask about hydrogen-based steel manufacturing? It got coverage in the latest TIME, and I can't tell if it's just an ad for the company profiled or if it has real potential. It works, anyway. There have been pilot plants in Sweden producing small batches. It demonstrates that it's possible to make steel without using a bunch of coal. It's not economically viable at the moment, though. Maybe economy of scale will help as it develops.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 01:56
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Where does the hydrogen come from? The HYBRIT plant profiled for the article says it's separated from water with renewable energy.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 02:05
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:https://twitter.com/markets/status/1521570590108254208?s=20&t=DM-kGhwo06H16NJJcbHzUg Of course the flip side of this is that coal also has tons of unmonitored methane emissions, particularly coming from abandoned coal mines that leak continuously until they are sealed and flooded. It's a tough situation because the reality is that all fossil fuels are pretty toxic, mildly radioactive, and generally terrible for humanity and the planet. quote:COLLEGE PARK, Md.—The amount of methane released into the atmosphere as a result of coal mining is likely much higher than previously calculated, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union recently.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Would this be an appropriate venue to ask about hydrogen-based steel manufacturing? It got coverage in the latest TIME, and I can't tell if it's just an ad for the company profiled or if it has real potential. Are they burning hydrogen to melt the iron or using hydrogen in place of coke somehow? You already can use induction to melt the iron so I dont see the point of using hydrogen fuel. Or is this just FINMET + renewable hydrogen.?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
karthun posted:Are they burning hydrogen to melt the iron or using hydrogen in place of coke somehow? You already can use induction to melt the iron so I dont see the point of using hydrogen fuel. Or is this just FINMET + renewable hydrogen.? I'm not sure and don't have time atm to reread, but I tracked down the time article, if others would like to take a look.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
It looks like they are injecting the hydrogen to replace coking coal to manufacture steel.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
karthun posted:Are they burning hydrogen to melt the iron or using hydrogen in place of coke somehow? They're using the hydrogen as a reducing agent. Edit: For anyone laboring under the misapprehension that the TMI documentary on Netflix might be worth watching, allow me to correct that. Michio Kaku shows up in the first five minutes. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 23:19 on May 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:They're using the hydrogen as a reducing agent. IIRC its based on the book by a guy from Union of Concerned Scientists. So, yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 23:22
|
|
|
At 13:45 we hear this: "On a weekly basis, you're allowed .3 rem. When my badge was read, it came out to be 2.8 rem, almost a hundred times what you're allowed to have."
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 23:39
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:At 13:45 we hear this:
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:At 13:45 we hear this: Oh no, 2.8 rem. Or 28 millisieverts. Which is something like a tenth of the total allowed dose for a grown adult.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 23:54
|
|
|
it’s about 65 times their daily dose guidelines if we’re being charitable but yeah this thing will probably just scare off more people
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
The risk quantization is what makes all the difference. You say to someone, "You were hit with 1mrem of radiation" and that means absolutely nothing to them. It's not a figure daily life equips people to parse. If you add, "Which is about the same level of risk as five minutes spent driving a car, or crossing the street five times." then they can go "Ohhh, no big deal then." The fact that numbers and limits can be reported completely without context is deliberately used to mislead, and it really gets my goose.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2022 09:11
|
|
|
aniviron posted:The risk quantization is what makes all the difference. You say to someone, "You were hit with 1mrem of radiation" and that means absolutely nothing to them. It's not a figure daily life equips people to parse. If you add, "Which is about the same level of risk as five minutes spent driving a car, or crossing the street five times." then they can go "Ohhh, no big deal then." of course. this happens when just about any risk for any subject is reported in the media. i agree it’s very frustrating
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2022 12:44
|
|
|
Did you know that even though it's supposed to be As Low As Reasonably Achievable, there are still atoms and energetic particles hitting you? Checkmate nerdcular powerdorks.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 01:21
|
|
|
Pander posted:Did you know that even though it's supposed to be As Low As Reasonably Achievable, there are still atoms and energetic particles hitting you? Checkmate nerdcular powerdorks. drat you Cosmos and Uranium in our planet's crust!
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 01:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/shelbywebb/status/1523709326556385285 https://twitter.com/shelbywebb/status/1523741919947407364 Wind energy is good, but let's try to avoid this sort of crazy variation. In other words, let's try not to be like Texas.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2022 20:47
|
|
|
Why is this happening? Is transmission capacity into the Houston area maxed out?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
Isn't prices going up in one area that needs power and prices going down in another area that has power to spare exactly what you'd expect to happen before trading happens and things equalize?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2022 22:48
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Isn't prices going up in one area that needs power and prices going down in another area that has power to spare exactly what you'd expect to happen before trading happens and things equalize? It's all well and good at the utility level, but Texas also lets utilities sell consumer power plans with variable price based on wholesale prices. http://www.powertochoose.org/en-us/Content/Resource/Plan-Options https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/20/us/texas-storm-electric-bills.html quote:“My savings is gone,” said Scott Willoughby, a 63-year-old Army veteran who lives on Social Security payments in a Dallas suburb. He said he had nearly emptied his savings account so that he would be able to pay the $16,752 electric bill charged to his credit card — 70 times what he usually pays for all of his utilities combined. “There’s nothing I can do about it, but it’s broken me.”
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2022 23:51
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Isn't prices going up in one area that needs power and prices going down in another area that has power to spare exactly what you'd expect to happen before trading happens and things equalize? https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Wind-solar-production-outstrips-transmission-in-16223706.php quote:“I started seeing some projects go off the boards, and [wind power] companies were saying they’re not going to build,” Darby said. “I asked why, and they said ‘We’ve had curtailments. We’re going to have to curtail production at certain times.’” The wind power literally can't help out the city's demand, because Texas transmission is just that lovely.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 01:23
|
|
|
transmission upgrades were a slow process pre-covid. i can't even imagine what the timeline is looking like now. and thats making the assumption that everyone involved actually wants to do it and isnt dragging their heels for political purposes.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 03:30
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:https://twitter.com/shelbywebb/status/1523709326556385285 This is the kind of crazy poo poo that's been happening in europe too, going from dirt cheap to expensive as hell. Even though the transfers are much better and things aren't as localized. Prices jumping all over like this is simply a thing of intermittent power generation. Don't see a way around it anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 04:21
|
|
|
Texas has power issues because they intentionally cut themselves off from neighboring state power grids in order to avoid federal regulations. Their problems are entirely of their own making. https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/energy-environment/2021/02/15/391519/why-does-texas-have-its-own-power-grid/
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 04:30
|
|
|
Now let's add another Houston to the grid over the next three years in the form of crypto mining operations.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 04:33
|
|
|
Of course, nationwide grid upgrades are completely impossible and off the table because they don't involve putting tax dollars directly into fossil execs' pockets.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 04:39
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Now let's add another Houston to the grid over the next three years in the form of crypto mining operations. going from the gbs buttcoin thread, there seems to be a minor butt implosion with a stable coin, this probably wont mean any thing bad for butts medium or long term, but who knows.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 05:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
PhazonLink posted:going from the gbs buttcoin thread, there seems to be a minor butt implosion with a stable coin, this probably wont mean any thing bad for butts medium or long term, but who knows. Yeah I have no particular insight on that, ERCOT (iirc) was forecasting about another Houston's worth of energy demand once Abbott finishes luring in all the crypto miners and unless there is something particularly unique about this implosion the scam will bounce back eventually.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2022 15:45
|
|