|
RichieWolk posted:This is a wasted effort; the public in general is stupid as gently caress and has no intention of changing that. Humanity would be better off just working to improve efficiency and technology; gently caress what stupid people think. Are people that stupid and fearful or are they misinformed? How much does the media actively ignore nuclear power, or emphasize nuclear disasters, while minimizing fossil fuel disasters? I heard a story on NPR a few days ago about how grid power isn't reliable in India so there is a big market for industrial private generators, and having reliable electricity is becoming a class divide. Problems with infrastructure were mentioned but limited to coal and oil. Nuclear Power was not mentioned at all (yes I know there is strong resistance to Nuclear in India). Nuclear has a PR curse. It will not be dispelled because when the media, politics, and the energy industries intersect; you'd better believe almost all the money exchanged is from fossil fuels. Dirty Bombs are a brilliant political deflection combining the ratings-grabbing public fear of atomz and terrorists. Adam Curtis covered Nuclear pretty well in the last episode of his great (and prophetic) 1992 series "Pandora's Box" http://youtu.be/1ON-EnaRtAw
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2012 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:50 |
|
|
LP97S posted:Now this could be good because Exelon already has plenty of experience with nuclear energy, on the other hand maybe I should use the bad word in the US and say "Nationalize all power systems" to save the time and effort. Don't be afraid to say it. It really needs to be done. Convert the grid to nuclear, subsidize distributed renewables, and then carve the nuke program into state authorities that can be privatized at the leisure of the State Governments. Once we've developed all this we can sell the knowledge and technology to India and China 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2012 04:20
|
|
|
Blimps are an excellent addition to the commercial air fleet. If you can make PVs that are light/flexible enough it could power itself. We will never stop using fossil fuels entirely. We use petroleum products for things other than fuel so the chemical infrastructure will still be needed. Casual air travel might use blimps, but there will still be jets when you need to be there in a few hours. In terms of efficiency a ship is very different from a car, giant diesel tankers will probably be around for awhile (I don't think the US Navy is keen on anyone else making nuclear ships) Isolated facilities use big rear end diesel generators I believe. I've read about mini nuke plants that aren't much bigger than a substation.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
I'm not spending my money on anything! It's all snake oil! Hey why isn't our consumer-driven economy getting better!?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:There is a type of person who, when congratulated for using less electricity than their neighbors, will deliberately start using more electricity. You will never convince this person to use less power voluntarily. This person eats entire meals of pure meat to spite vegetarians and drives an SUV a few times around the block to spite environmentalists People who do not want to be convinced, eh? 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:50 |
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:It seems to me that we should simply force the power companies to permanently shut down the fossil fuel plants first when efficiency lowers demand. Some form of incentives to keep the renewables up? Tax credit stuff if they shut down coal plants first? In the economics of the "free market" fossil fuels remain the best option because all the infrastructure and technology is geared toward it, in addition to subsidies that the industry can lobby for. This will continue as long as there is some place to get fuel (arctic, antarctic, deep sea, domestic coal deposits waiting to be stripped) You seem just short of endorsing nationalization, which is what should be done
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2012 15:25
|
|