http://www.seeker.com/nuclear-waste-and ... newssocialNuclear Waste and Diamonds Make Batteries That Last 5,000 Years
An entirely new kind of electrical generation system could create abundant clean energy and also dispose of nuclear waste.
Nuclear Power
Re: Atomic Energy
- Svartalf
- Offensive Grail Keeper
- Posts: 40421
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
- Location: Paris France
- Contact:
Re: Atomic Energy
currently less efficient thant an RTG weight for weight, but there is hope for further developments.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
- rainbow
- Posts: 13544
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
- About me: Egal wie dicht du bist, Goethe war Dichter
- Location: Africa
- Contact:
Re: Atomic Energy
It only handles a very little bit of the nuke waste.DRSB wrote:http://www.seeker.com/nuclear-waste-and ... newssocialNuclear Waste and Diamonds Make Batteries That Last 5,000 Years
An entirely new kind of electrical generation system could create abundant clean energy and also dispose of nuclear waste.
Carbon14, which is not terribly terrible being a beta emitter.
...and natural. Lots of it around.
Every breath you take has some.
I call bullshit - Alfred E Einstein
BArF−4
BArF−4
- rainbow
- Posts: 13544
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
- About me: Egal wie dicht du bist, Goethe war Dichter
- Location: Africa
- Contact:
Re: Atomic Energy
I call bullshit - Alfred E Einstein
BArF−4
BArF−4
- Pappa
- Non-Practicing Anarchist
- Posts: 56484
- Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
- About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.
- Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
Unfortunately, the Green movement in the West has the baggage of CND weighing it down. There doesn't seem to be much rational understanding of nuclear power either amongst Greens or in the population generally. In the UK, we've dithered over it for so long that we're at risk of needing to rely on fossil fuels for a lot longer than should have been necessary. I think governments have dithered mostly because they fear the inevitable public backlash. It's a shame, because had we invested in new nuclear technologies, we could be using our stockpiles of nuclear waste to fuel fast-breeder reactors by now. It's a really safe way to generate electricity and in combination with renewables, could remove our reliance on fossil fuels forever.
- Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 47554
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
I blame the Internet. It confuses common folk.
- laklak
- Posts: 20988
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
- About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
- Location: Tannhauser Gate
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
The lumpen have been confused for centuries, the interwebz have just made it easier to be stupid.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
- Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 47554
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
Yeah but now they are stupid about many many things!
Re: Nuclear Power
This!Pappa wrote:Unfortunately, the Green movement in the West has the baggage of CND weighing it down. There doesn't seem to be much rational understanding of nuclear power either amongst Greens or in the population generally. In the UK, we've dithered over it for so long that we're at risk of needing to rely on fossil fuels for a lot longer than should have been necessary. I think governments have dithered mostly because they fear the inevitable public backlash. It's a shame, because had we invested in new nuclear technologies, we could be using our stockpiles of nuclear waste to fuel fast-breeder reactors by now. It's a really safe way to generate electricity and in combination with renewables, could remove our reliance on fossil fuels forever.
The Greens keep talking about Tchernobyl, most of them cannot locate it on the map, as if no technological advance has been made since. Even pointing out to them the number of actual deaths directly attributable to the accident as compared to the number of deaths caused by smog worldwide annually (about 2-3 mln), does not make any impression on them. Number of deaths directly attributable to the Fukushima accident: zero so far.
This is from Wikipedia
38 people whose deaths are directly attributable to the Chernobyl disaster. Of these, two died at the scene, four died in a single helicopter accident, 29 died within a few months of Acute Radiation Syndrome (ARS) and three died later, perhaps from medical complications probably[dubious – discuss] caused by the accident. One was a cinematographer, one a physician, five military personnel (four in a single helicopter), seven firefighters, two security guards and the rest staff at the power plant or subcontractors. At least one other person is reported to have died of a coronary thrombosis at the scene, and nine children are reported to have died of thyroid cancer (in 2005 that number was raised to 15[8]), but identifications are not known. No members of the general public were hospitalized in the month following the accident,[9] though a pair of fishermen, Pustavoit and Protasov, reportedly received 400 REM doses.[10] There were a total of 137 confirmed cases of ARS, including Pyotr Palamarchuk who survived after a reported exposure to 800 roentgens, twice the usual death dose.[11]
- Svartalf
- Offensive Grail Keeper
- Posts: 40421
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
- Location: Paris France
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
Given how our world class specialist in nuclear power can't seem to be able to build the 'next generation' of new reactors that it touts as the wave of the future, (Olkiluoto and Flamanville), I'm not sure there have been real technological advances in large scale nuclear power generation... breeder reactors seem to have been abandoned as a cold war thing, and other technical advances seem to be restricted to small scale, experimental facilities...
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
- Scot Dutchy
- Posts: 19000
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
- About me: Dijkbeschermer
- Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
- Contact:
- Svartalf
- Offensive Grail Keeper
- Posts: 40421
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
- Location: Paris France
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
they are 5 years in our future, and in 5 years they'll still be, I guess.
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping
- rainbow
- Posts: 13544
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
- About me: Egal wie dicht du bist, Goethe war Dichter
- Location: Africa
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
I call bullshit - Alfred E Einstein
BArF−4
BArF−4
- Scot Dutchy
- Posts: 19000
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
- About me: Dijkbeschermer
- Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
Always amazed at views of the future (1922):
Radio was the game back then.
Radio was the game back then.
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: Nuclear Power
Skyping on mobile phones with LCD screens for everyone in 1929.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests