nuclear power

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > nuclear power

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Baloogan posted:

i like nuclear power and thers like lots of uranium in the sea and its not hard to centrifuge the uranium out because its so heavy and also u can make fresh water from the salt water and irrigate the planet

Can I say I like this pro-science bender you've been on

Also imagine if we manufactured our fossil fuels out of seawater during the slack time of a reactor's operation (11 pm 6 am) We could also just take the carbon out of the sea water and use it elsewhere

Nuclear power: it's the poo poo

# ¿ Apr 23, 2017 18:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 30, 2024 18:36

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

mister magpie posted:

haha you think their record is perfect

Dude's right, aside from Thresher there's literally no record of even a minor nuclear accident happening in the US Navy. They are really drat good at nuclear power. For that matter, if you exclude the Soviets/Russians the safety record in Naval projects generally is fantastic

Nebakenezzer has issued a correction as of 22:25 on Apr 24, 2017

# ¿ Apr 24, 2017 22:20

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

mister magpie posted:

I was in the navy nuclear program from 02 - 08

Honestly if you know otherwise I'd be interested in hearing

# ¿ Apr 24, 2017 22:50

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

mysterious frankie posted:

Use rhyming slang to get around the rule.

It's perfectly legal if you say it happened to a friend, that's how we learned about the SR-71

# ¿ Apr 25, 2017 00:16

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Not a Step posted:

I was at a Democratic platform meeting last night and this older lady used her speaking time to rant about nuclear power. Then she got back in line, waited patiently, and gave another three minute anti-nuclear rant. I don't get how someone can be pro-science and anti-nuclear at the same time.

You know how conservatives kinda believe in stuff just for reactionary/historical reasons? (Like for example wind and solar are bad because liberals like it)

Well liberals do the same thing

# ¿ Apr 25, 2017 21:31

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Coolguye posted:

when i hear half life i think about https://lparchive.org/Half-Life-2/

I think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dttKjLpGkwE

Because we're never gonna meet up with Alyx. This song is Gordon Freeman singing

# ¿ Apr 27, 2017 23:22

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Also with all due respect WTF is with your technophobia crazy cloud

You are posting these words using a computer

If you're using a cellphone the transmitter is microwave and you hold it next to your head

# ¿ Apr 27, 2017 23:28

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Not a Step posted:

So did that kid from Into the Wild

That kid from Into the wild walked into a wilderness without any supplies save a sack of rice and the only information he had was a (incorrect) card he had stolen from a library

His egoism killed him, or he had an actual death wish

# ¿ Apr 28, 2017 01:45

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Coolguye posted:

yeah it absolutely amazes me that all these years later we are still explaining to people that chernobyl was the single greatest instance of 'hold my beer' in human history, not some inevitable consequence of the powers we were playing with

Yeah, it's difficult to understate how hosed up Chernobyl was compared to every other nuclear accident

Like, if the people making decisions before the accident wanted specifically create the worst possible nuclear disaster, they couldn't have done much better

# ¿ Apr 28, 2017 16:59

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Actual bad ideas for nuclear power:

# ¿ Apr 28, 2017 20:53

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Prav posted:

that's not a very subtle cross there

"The whole airplane has to be dragged into a specially constructed hanger/hot room, where the reactor has to be removed by remote control, and placed in a pool. Meanwhile, the nose is on the other side of several feet of lead and concrete, and the squidgy organic bits can deplane in relative safety. The actual plane itself would have to have a 'massive' amount of shielding, which is just the thing aeronautical engineers like to hear. The people who made this design study still figured this would not be enough to protect the crew against significant radiation exposure, and figured that training flights would be kept to a minimum, and restricted to low power at that. The crew would undertake one actual mission on a full power profile - and then they would have received the maximum safe lifetime exposure to radiation, and would never fly the atomic hate needle ever again."

# ¿ Apr 28, 2017 21:33

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

What we're saying is that generating electricity and powering merchant ships with thorium salt nuclear reactors is not crazy at all

Nebakenezzer posted:

1950s Life: Military not giving up on the whole 'atomic airplane' idea

You have to admire their perseverance, I suppose.

The main debate among the brains of the time was "should we modify an existing airframe or design a new one?" The main concern was of course a atomic plane gap with the Soviets.

This concept is interesting, though like the last atomic atomic bomber we've seen, it places special emphasis on putting the crew far away from the reactor, which tells me even 1950s engineers were not so confidant about the the whole 'lightweight radiation shield' problem.

The atomic powered early warning aircraft makes sense, assuming you could build it big enough so that the crew isn't forced to live in Type VII U-boat squalor in a tiny shielded compartment at the front for weeks at a time. I'm not seeing the advantages of a nuclear powered B-57, though :/

Launching ICBMs from a nuclear powered airplane is, ah, interesting. You guys have been talking about servicing the past few pages - imagine the service bulletins that thing would generate. It has *twin* reactors, and carries something like 2 Titan IIs fueled on its wings, in the upper atmosphere, during all weathers. The "low level supersonic ramjet bomber" is probably actually less problematic from a maintenance standpoint, since I think Ramjets don't need moving parts. I also can't imagine it'd be more dangerous to its crews than the B-58. Then again, the accidents would probably be memorable in a way that a supersonic bomber merely exploding and crashing with a thermonuclear bomb on board positively dull.

Given how the 1950s rolled with Health and Safety, I think we should be glad it never happened.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2017 00:44

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Tunicate posted:

Also occasionally killing a couple hundred thousand people

North Korea?

# ¿ Apr 29, 2017 12:13

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Coolguye posted:

from a biological angle it's kind of doubtful anything with a DNA repair scheme much more elaborate than our own would have ever had the spare energy to get big brains and flexible niche behaviors the way we have. DNA repair is an energy-intensive process, and the one we have is really drat good for the few resources it requires. single mutations are handled by a backup copy, and double-mutations that corrupt both copies can be repaired through end-joining. it could be more effective a couple of ways, but all those ways require either some really serious glucose and lipid input (and therefore hurt our chances to survive mundane famine) or some really funky chemistry that makes our homeostasis a lot easier to shock. naked mole rats basically went the former route, but the extra energy they put into hostile environment survival left relatively little left over for brain size. brains are insanely energy hungry.

prly doesn't matter in the long run, CRISPR will likely allow you to back up an idealized version of your DNA and allow you to undergo an IV treatment forcing it back into your body like a memetic virus in 30 years or something

Non trump admin naked mole rat question: why did naked mole rats need special DNA repair?

# ¿ May 4, 2017 00:29

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Baloogan posted:

radium gas is my best guess

I'm reading the wikipedia article and the biology involved is well beyond my crush depth

The mole rat is such an odd clusterfuck of an animal - it has a social structure like ants or bees, can survive in environments very high in CO2, and doesn't have pain receptors in its skin

I can see why mutated ones appear in Fallout

# ¿ May 4, 2017 15:31

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

bewbies posted:

Against all odds Buzzfeed did a good article on the Radium Girls.

# ¿ May 8, 2017 17:31

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

OK this is hilarious:

The state of Georgia wanted to build two new nuclear reactors at a nuclear complex known as "Vogtle". South Carolina also wanted two new nuke plants. In 2007 construction of these plants started, with figurative nuclear giant Westinghouse dreaming of build all four plants as "modules" greatly reducing construction costs. The contractors for this are Toshiba, which bought Westinghouse (the company that popularized AC electricity!!) and another construction firm named Chicago Bridge & Iron Co . With energy prices spiking and worries about global warming, there was a shitload of federal cash to subsidize this project. These next generation plants were going to be more efficient and use interchangeable parts, driving down costs. It was supposed to be start of a atomic power renaissance

It is now 2017. The plants are half finished and billions overbudget. Georgia has been "pre-billing" its customers to pay for the expansion for years, and will presumably continue to do so after the project is done. Westinghouse has declared bankruptcy. Toshiba is taking billions in losses.

there are reasons for this

Some sort of Louisiana swamp magnate bought the company that used to do lots of nuclear plants, Stone & Webster Inc. They of course were just a hollow shell of what they once were, having no plants to construct for the past 30 years.
Swamp magnate manages to use the name of Stone and Webster to land a shitton of construction contracts
Big surprise, Swamp magnate sucks at building nuclear reactors, as does Stone & Webster, having in essence forgotten how to do it
Swamp thing sells his construction company to Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. for 3.3 billion in 2012
Three years later, Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. sells swamp thing construction company to Westinghouse/Toshiba for 230 million
Apparently even this was too much, and Toshiba accused Chicago Bridge of inflating the value of swamp thing construction by 2 billion or so
Sues, court case, renegotiation, etc
Meanwhile, all sorts of new regulations get thrown up, complicating construction
and constant mistakes in construction mean expensive things are done wrong and have to be redone
Westinghouse takes on all the liabilities all these delays cause, something it extremely regrets and these penalties and debts drive it into bankruptcy
MOAR pure comedy: the price of electricity has declined quite a bit thanks to the 2008 + economic catasterfuck so these costs will have to be absorbed over a much longer time period

TL,DR: People tried building a bunch of nuke plants and it turned out very poorly, suddenly people are all like "renewables, eh?"

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/business/westinghouse-toshiba-nuclear-bankruptcy.html?_r=0
http://www.myajc.com/business/plant-vogtle-georgia-nuclear-renaissance-now-financial-quagmire/5l16IFMFICknSCeI7RXG6J/
http://www.economist.com/news/business/21719836-global-nuclear-power-industry-beset-problems-westinghouse-files-bankruptcy
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-13/toshiba-s-nuclear-reactor-mess-winds-back-to-a-louisiana-swamp

# ¿ May 23, 2017 23:51

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

mister magpie posted:

I was at a show and some guys said I looked like a dude in a band. asked me about myself. asked about NUCLEAR POWER when I mentioned my old job.

it's amazing how much NUCLEAR POWER knowledge you can remember while high.

And you won't risk breaking national security for the amusement of several random strangers ITT :sulks:

# ¿ May 24, 2017 00:17

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

mister magpie posted:

I didn't mentioned classified stuff. just how it works. any fool can look it up.

I know

I just never pass up a chance to sulk

Question, what's the best part to describe while stoned? Reactor PW loops heating outside loops?

# ¿ May 24, 2017 01:12

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Yinlock posted:

"hey bill this new backup system seems to be triggering every single failsafe when we try to test it"

"then our path is clear: shut down the failsafes"

"what"

that happened once

It was really bad, obviously, but still

# ¿ May 25, 2017 00:51

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

We build first a sarcophagus for it that inspired some visuals in Half-Life 2. Then an international consortium spent large amounts of money building a shelter for it that was so challenging and high tech PBS made an hour long documentary on the subject and I watched it

# ¿ May 25, 2017 03:04

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Everybody knows that mercury and heavy metals like chromium in coal smoke are super bad for you, there's nothing to confirm

If you needed to confirm it, you could just spend a week in China

# ¿ Jun 1, 2017 21:57

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Fullhouse posted:

but what about Clean Coal

I think if you reacted coal in a fuel cell you'd get power and keep all the nasty stuff contained; burning it? No, just no

# ¿ Jun 2, 2017 15:24

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Truth: coal power plants release far more radiation than nuclear ones

# ¿ Jun 2, 2017 22:08

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Baloogan posted:

solar plants rely on a natural fusion reaction that has given millions, possibly billions of people radiation burns and is responsible for most skin cancers i think

That's true

Sun? Not in my backyard!

# ¿ Jun 3, 2017 01:47

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Cyrano4747 posted:

Great article about the USS Savanah, the US's only nuclear powered cargo vessel and Cold War as gently caress.

Seriously, look at the pictures of the interior. The dining room is like something out of Fallout.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/07/aboard-the-ns-savannah-americas-first-and-last-nuclear-merchant-ship/

# ¿ Jul 26, 2017 19:55

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

BarronsArtGallery posted:

has anyone posted about Thorium yet?

because I'm thinking of changing my name back to Thorium and resuming my duties to remind people about LFTRs whenever possible

Please do, this is the thread for it

# ¿ Jul 27, 2017 22:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 30, 2024 18:36

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

BarronsArtGallery posted:

THORIUM!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9M__yYbsZ4

(there's nut everywhere)

I concur, THORIUM

Now where's the research money to get this poo poo started

# ¿ Aug 2, 2017 19:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > nuclear power