Climate in the 21st Century

Will Humankind see the 22nd Century?

  • Not a fucking chance

    Votes: 44 27.5%

  • Maybe. if we get our act together

    Votes: 42 26.3%

  • Yes, we will survive

    Votes: 74 46.3%
  • Total voters
    160
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Three Berries said:
Yes. Look up half life decay for uranium.
Click to expand...
I'm not following the connection between the half-life and how long it can be used for, but you're just saying that because some version of the elements exist, then it's technically possible for them to be reused? I'm no scientist, so I have no idea how split atoms are put back together again, or how many times they can be split. I don't imagine that's a simple process.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Again, I'm not a scientist, but I don't think radioactivity and fuel are the same thing. All I'm working with here is grade school memory from however many decades ago, but the electricity is generated from heat created by splitting atoms, which means that the material has changed. There must be a process of "unchanging" it so that it can be used again, and I'm guessing that's not easy.
 
Three Berries

Three Berries

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Again, I'm not a scientist, but I don't think radioactivity and fuel are the same thing. All I'm working with here is grade school memory from however many decades ago, but the electricity is generated from heat created by splitting atoms, which means that the material has changed. There must be a process of "unchanging" it so that it can be used again, and I'm guessing that's not easy.
Click to expand...
No it's not easy. Originally nuclear plants generated waste that was the source for and still is Plutonium. This is what is used in nuclear weapons' and not a naturally occurring material. There are other different nuclear reactors that use different fuels. But all do the same, as the purified materials is allowed to decay it generates heat.

I believe the Canadian CANDU reactors use spent fuel as waste.

 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
hanimmal said:
View attachment 5012316
Click to expand...
Lol sorry, which I had a more informed take.

Did find this per google...

whatisnuclear.com

What is nuclear recycling?

Learn what recycling nuclear waste is, and what breeder reactors are. Did you know that typical nuclear reactors only use about 1% of the energy in their fuel, and that nuclear waste is recyclable?
whatisnuclear.com whatisnuclear.com

Breeder reactors can create as much or more fissile material (atoms that readily split) than they use. These special reactors are designed to have extra neutrons flying around, so that some can convert U-238 to Pu-239 (see above) and the others can run the reactor. Often, these special reactors are deemed "fast" reactors because the neutrons are moving through the reactor at higher speeds, on average. In a full breeder fuel cycle, we get the maximum use of the Uranium resources on Earth, and what we already know exists can last tens of thousands of years. The cycle has cost and proliferation concerns associated with any closed cycle. Additionally, we have significantly less operational experience with breeder reactors, so we would need to train builders and operators for such a machine. Using a Thorium cycle instead of a Uranium-Plutonium cycle may allow breeding in less exotic reactors. Using this kind of fuel cycle, nuclear power can truly be considered sustainable.
Click to expand...
But, it looks like breeders are more dangerous. Chernobyl was a breeder reactor, so that's not great.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Three Berries said:
No it's not easy. Originally nuclear plants generated waste that was the source for and still is Plutonium. This is what is used in nuclear weapons' and not a naturally occurring material. There are other different nuclear reactors that use different fuels. But all do the same, as the purified materials is allowed to decay it generates heat.

I believe the Canadian CANDU reactors use spent fuel as waste.

Click to expand...
Would it be republicans embracing recycling and technological advancements..? Because we're not there yet. For nuclear to last how ever many thousands of years you're talking about, we'd need to completely revamp the way we do it. We'd need to be open to some new ideas with the technology. How's that going to happen?
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
who says it has to?

The goal is 52% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

It would be nice if radical right wingers would stick to facts when making accusations. Instead they get all angry and exaggerate in order to appeal to emotions instead of reason.

You should try being reasonable and rational like liberals are.
Click to expand...
He isn't the radical right wing anymore. The Republicans have had a purge. Nothing left but whackos. This is just the right wing now.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
mooray said:
Lol sorry, which I had a more informed take.

Did find this per google...

whatisnuclear.com

What is nuclear recycling?

Learn what recycling nuclear waste is, and what breeder reactors are. Did you know that typical nuclear reactors only use about 1% of the energy in their fuel, and that nuclear waste is recyclable?
whatisnuclear.com whatisnuclear.com



But, it looks like breeders are more dangerous. Chernobyl was a breeder reactor, so that's not great.
Click to expand...
lol that wasn't about you man.
 
injinji

injinji

Well-Known Member
smokinrav said:
Yeah, you can't get transmission lines built in central Illinois.

www.seattletimes.com

Unique underground power line would send renewable energy from Midwest to Eastern markets

The Soo Green Line would be a unique addition to the U.S. electricity grid. Running along a railroad corridor, the 350-mile-long underground power line would ship low-cost renewable energy.
www.seattletimes.com www.seattletimes.com
Click to expand...
What they need to do is put up a coal fired plant right in the middle of the proposed transmission lines, and I bet all the resistance would just melt away.
 
M

mooray

Well-Known Member
Came across the below. Always like the humanizing we see from Vice.

Ultimately, if a republican really wants to work on problems like this, they're going to have to embrace socialized energy production. Which, as a lifelong pge customer, I fully-fucking-support that.

 
printer

printer

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top