|
I hope everyone involved in the above ridiculous discussion realizes exactly how dumb the idea of telling people to spend $20 now so they can save $5 over the next 15 years is.
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
computer parts posted:Would you also like to share your opinions on home insulation and higher efficiency vehicles? If you want people to do something inconvenient your return is going to have to be a lot better than pennies a year over the next 2 decades. CFLs and LEDs aren't going to win over many converts on cost savings just because the savings are small and the time frame is far too long.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Maybe you should take your misguided, five year old arguments elsewhere? CFLs are a clearly superior choice to incandescents today with payback periods measured in months, and the same will probably be true of LEDs by the end of the decade. computer parts posted:So I take it your answer to my previous question was "exactly like lightbulbs, chief"?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Is it enough to retire on? Of course not, but it'll make that retirement just a little bit nicer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:It's the exact same argument that caused the surge in demand for fuel efficiency, so maybe you should rethink your position. Pay day loans prey on people who live hand to mouth, not people who can afford to buy LED bulbs If you look at the numbers you'll also notice that "greenness" has been a significant driver of hybrid vehicle sales even when the math isn't in their favor.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:the fact that we'd be strapping ourselves to yet another non-renewable resource that we'd have to get over in another hundred years or so, it seems like biting the bullet and splashing out for true renewables would be the best course of action here?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Part of the heating system would be a series of pipes, filled with these salts. Excess heat would melt them during the day, then they would give off the heat as they resolidified during the night. They'd be essentially maintenance free and last for decades.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 06:19
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:I'm not concerned about reactors maliciously melting down in spite of all of our best efforts because nuclear just hates our children and freedom. I'm concerned about what happens when we inevitably gently caress it up.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:So if we assume that uranium is 25% of the operating cost, then raising the uranium cost by 5x would roughly double the operating costs of running a nuclear plant. Doesn't sound insignificant to me, unless I am missing something or doing the math wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
CombatInformatiker posted:The problem is that you can't just view it from a global point of view, you have to look at the local effects. If radioactive waste were to leak into ground water, you can't just say that it's insignificant compared to the total amount of radiation on earth, so you have to make sure that it cannot contaminate your soil or your water. Keep in mind that there are a lot of countries with high energy demand which do not have the US's luxury of large, uninhabited wastelands where is doesn't really matter if some radiation leaks into the ground. Or you could get rid of waste the way the Italians do. Hand it to the mafia along with a big suitcase full of money and then pretend it never existed in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2013 09:17
|
|
|
Frogmanv2 posted:http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/business/renewables-can-do-24-hour-baseload-anywhere-anytime/
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Frogmanv2 posted:Article showing that 99.9% uptime is possible with just renewables, in America. 15 years ago we were going to have fusion power in 15 years.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
Dusseldorf posted:Excess energy can also be put into things like Aluminum production, especially if the plants work off peak hours.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Nuclear is not renewable.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Just because our supply of something is near infinite compared to current or future use does not mean that it is renewable. There is a certain amount of uranium in the earth's crust, if we were to mine it all we would not have any more.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
redreader posted:I'm seeing this posted on facebook a lot: http://ukiahcommunityblog.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/fukushima-28-signs-that-the-west-coast-is-being-absolutely-fried-with-nuclear-radiation/ You know how I know? Because radiation isn't like some kind of secret ray that only black helicopters can detect. If poo poo is radioactive enough to actually do damage it's pretty obvious. Like way too obvious to hide. Any idiot could buy the equipment off Amazon and test himself so these articles wouldn't be full of "some people say" they'd have numbers. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Oct 27, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
Arghy posted:they will gladly explain to you whats going on. In fact most would be thrilled that another human has showed interest in whatever incredibly esoteric subject they study.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 09:17
|
|
|
CombatInformatiker posted:Unrelated to the current discussion: Edit: If you can get away with having your nukes pump water uphill all night you could probably use hydro to cover peaks.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Quantum Mechanic posted:Nuclear power is relatively safe and clean as long as it's properly overseen, controlled and regulated.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Hobo Erotica posted:Also my original questions weren't meant to start the same old nuclear argument again, I really just wanted to know what's the deal with the fuel rods in Japan. What's going to happen to them? What happens if they touch, or are exposed to air? Are they going to move them, and if so, how? If the hot fuel rods are exposed to air they'll heat up, burn, and melt. That would be a bad thing for obvious reasons. They'll probably be removed and packed into casks for long term storage at some point. A lot of material is going to have to be very carefully disassembled and packed away during the mitigation process. It is going to take a long time and be incredibly boring, so I doubt it will get much news coverage. TEPCO isn't being particularly forthcoming with the press, but the government seems to have whipped them into line. What information does come out is in Japanese, so we aren't hearing a whole lot in the rest of the world.What I've seen translated is all pretty mundane. At the moment the Japanese government seems to have a handle on things so I don't see any reason for the international community to do anything other than provide support as requested. Though with the proliferation of nuclear technology into less developed states I can certainly see the utility of having an international nuclear accident task force ready.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Is this "Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center" a thing to trick idiots into buying geiger counters they don't need or what's the deal? It appears to be run by apocalypse-obsessed Christian Fundamentalists.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
Adenoid Dan posted:Yes, there are 5 gyres where floating debris gets trapped (although large amounts escape and wash up on shore), but they are still quite large, and the density of the garbage is pretty low.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:We could also use overcapacity to filter carbondioxide out of the air and sea, and make hydrocarbons once fossil fuels get expensive enough to make the process worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Yeah, the issue is that mocking freep doesn't make you left-wing and to be honest American liberals really aren't leftists. The age of LF is over, and D&D is more or less reflecting the American political perspective....which is a pretty big shift to the right.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
JohnGalt posted:Its not something that another president could reignite then? Also, how scientifically solid was it to put there? I work with a guy who was a hydrogeologist involved with the project in some capacity and he swears that it was a case of science providing the best possible solution (from a geologic perspective) and there was no real reason to oppose it. silence_kit posted:Don't people in this thread get tired of whining about how nuclear energy is politically unpopular in the US? Do we really need to devote another 60 pages of this thread to this subject?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
What kind of service life does a large scale solar-thermal plant have? I imagine that highly reflective panels aren't exactly the most robust things in the world.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I'm seeing around 30 years, maybe 50.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Hmm, speaking of which it brings to mind the little problem the solar bikepath in the Netherlands had: Edit: Is it "the Netherlands" or just "Netherlands" like Ukraine?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
So roughly how big a hunk of Plutonium would I need to get a decent amount of horsepower out of an RTG?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:So according to wikipedia "one gram of plutonium-238 generates approximately 0.5 watts of thermal power." so at 750 watts and ~20% thermoelectric efficiency it's ~7.5 kg/HP. Also you need a heatsink that can dissipate the 3.5 kW, so if you want to heat something at the same time it's just dandy. Get on it American auto industry. Edit: And the heater would be fantastic!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:Who the hell wrote that and why do they still say "plumbum" and "wolfram" The Russian word for "Tungsten" is вольфра́м (Wolfram) so it's just a direct translation.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:A big untouched wilderness isn't really worth anything if all the humans are stuck in hellhole megacities which are polluted to gently caress and back.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Notice all that sweet sweet wind action up in corn country? Edit: Flying into Copenhagen and seeing those turbines cutting through the fog is one of the coolest things ever. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Apr 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:In the US, don't we already have a lot of agricultural land where we could put windmills anyway? just a drop in the bucket, then it doesn't matter much.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Also countries that aren't America exist
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm not sure if I would call Carter under-informed or "silly" in his opinions of nuclear power.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
blowfish posted:If uranium or thorium run out There is a lot of Uranium. It is a not insignificant fraction of the total mass of Earth.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Tias posted:Renewable plants failing just become an inert building taking up some space Renewable power generation is an industrial process that is no less harmful to the environment than most other industrial processes. Remediation will still have to be carried out when renewable infrastructure is obsoleted or ends its service life.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm not replying to smug assholes who can't see the difference betwen a chemical refinery and a wave energy station. Bye.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
Tias posted:Dude, you were born a shitposter, and you'll die a shitposter. Provoke yourself if you want to, but I got better things to do with my time than replying to your shitbrained flailings. Tias posted:Renewable plants failing just become an inert building taking up some space
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 18:03
|
|