Do you have any idea the effects from raising gasoline 2 bucks a gallon? That would be catastrophic.
Global warming pauses... for sixteen years
- Thread starter desert dude
- Start date
Do you have any idea the effects from raising gasoline 2 bucks a gallon? That would be catastrophic.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
"In contrast, the amount of natural uranium required to provide the
same amount of energy as 16 kg of fossil fuels, in a standard fission reactor,
is 2 grams; and the resulting waste weighs one quarter of a gram. (This 2 g
of uranium is not as small as one millionth of 16 kg per day, by the way,
because todays reactors burn up less than 1% of the uranium.) To deliver
2 grams of uranium per day, the miners at the uranium mine would have
to deal with perhaps 200 g of ore per day."
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c24/page_161.shtml
"Uranium can be used 60 times more efficiently in fast breeder reactors,
which burn up all the uranium both the [SUP]238[/SUP]U and the [SUP]235[/SUP]U (in contrast to
the once-through reactors, which burn mainly [SUP]235[/SUP]U). As long as we dont
chuck away the spent fuel that is spat out by once-through reactors, this
source of depleted uranium could be used too, so uranium that is put in
once-through reactors need not be wasted."
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c24/page_163.shtml
"Tailored waste forms that would only have to
remain intact for 500 years, after which
material would no longer be hazardous
Lacking plutonium, waste would not be useful
for making weapons"
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NuclearFastReactorsSA1205.pdf
co2 being pumped into the air in huge quantities and if AGW is real is doing alot of harm to the planet/ environment (wait till gw really hits for extinctions)
nuclear isnt pumped into atmosphere (events like fukishima are rare and was an old design reactor)
across the board nuclear is safer and more environmentally friendly than all other options
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You're completely insane, it's conversion to energy ratio is unimportant and predictable using Einsteins good aul reliable E=mc^2.
You fucking liberals never fail to astound me.
The only "clean" nuclear is fusion, currently it's almost at a 1 to 1 power input/output ratio, but getting above that (once it's reached) will also be a mammoth task.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
fusion isnt about inusable form atm sry
if the waste is contained entirely can it be called dirty?
your gonna have to work on your trolling a bit i think
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
No you're gonna have to figure out what logical reasoning is, nuclear power is not clean by any stretch of the wildest imagination, if I was trolling you'd be mad by now, I'm just dealing in facts here.
Good day to you sir.
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
go on then explain the effects on the environment of your standard nuclear power station
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You can Wiki that yourself, or ask the Japanese people...nuclear has done nothing but shit all over their country.
Samwell Seed Well
Well-Known Member
do you know the difference between mean , medium and avg . . . . lmfao . ..
or how statistics are even plotted in scattered ranges and values like this . . . .this is basic stuff , weather is a warming trend due to human's or natural cycle changes is not relevant
warming cycle is evident, CO2 emissions from humans dont help, e.i acidification of our seas(not a normal accurance in a warming trend throughout history), so any other argument is pointless . . you people
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Let me ask you global warming nuts a question....
How long does it have to plateau or dip for you to STFU???
In the 70's the global warming psycho's found that they could not substantiate their data so they flipped over to global cooling psycho's...
Now we are back to a global warming scare...
Cant make up your fucking minds...
How long does it have to plateau or dip for you to STFU???
In the 70's the global warming psycho's found that they could not substantiate their data so they flipped over to global cooling psycho's...
Now we are back to a global warming scare...
Cant make up your fucking minds...
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Phil Jones one of the climate change alarmists originally said a pause of 15 years would cause "worry" about the whole global warming hypothesis. Now that we have passed that threshold he has moved the goal posts. Surprise!
My guess is that the AGW crowd won't change their stance till they have icicles hanging off their balls.
"Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did."
"Yet in 2009, when the plateau was already becoming apparent and being discussed by scientists, he told a colleague in one of the Climategate emails: ‘Bottom line: the “no upward trend” has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’"
http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/15/a-16-year-pause-in-global-warming
Samwell Seed Well
Well-Known Member
whats funny is you two cant read a scatter plot . . . . .or even know what trends mean besides hanna montana or lady gaga . . . . . . . keep up the pseudo science
we will stick to observation, test, conclusion
we will stick to observation, test, conclusion
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I thought NASA already came out with a paper explaining climate hysteria is caused by Sun spot activity?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I remember that show. cn
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Well, the glow you give off might be green.
You asked 4 questions that have NOTHING to do with the views of RP. He didn't like the civil rights act because it gave government too much power over private business, had nothing to do with skin color, but of course a reverse racist like yourself sees racism in EVERYTHING!! Its the only way you can try to justify your failures.
To londonfog , everything is just a plan, perpetrated by the man, to keep a brother down.
Yeah, but NASA only knows how to send someone into space, their just a bunch of morons in any other sense.
canndo
Well-Known Member
We are realeasing it, and we will release more of it as it gets into the infrastructure of the country. I am not "against" it, I am simply for complete knnowlege of what we are getting into.
In fact I covet a natural gas automobile. I have two friends with them, one has a home refuling station, he would love it except that he is a snob and hates to be seen in the car rather than his BMW. Run out of gas? get towed. Get low on gas? better not turn the engine off. Stop at an older fueling station? you get 3/4 full and not full. Want a trunk? forget it. If you don't plan your trip around fueling, you will run out.
but I believe he told me he was paying an equivelent of $1.24 a gallon.
canndo
Well-Known Member
And yet Nuclear can contribute to global warming simply by..... warming the atmosphere. (I doubt it is much)
canndo
Well-Known Member
Here is the situation. If we stick to our current course, we will have shortages of fuel and people in the northeast will... freeze and die. If we tax the stuff, we can use some of the taxes to subsidize the poor's use of that fuel.
My father frequently said "if you keep going the way you are headed, eventualy you will arrive". If we keep energy prices artificialy low for long enough, we will encounter the consequences.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Exactly Althor, it would be catestrophic. Do you think it will never reach that price on its own? Do you think that a shortfall of a million brls a day wouldn't spike the price up by that amount? Do you think that any one of half a dozen different scenarios wouln't put the price even higher, if even temporarily?
Best we do it now and normalize it - do it in increments of 20 cents over the course of 5 years. Or do you actually think that we can insulate ourselves from the global oil market by drilling somewhere?
Your brethren, those who believe that on the one hand, there is unlimited oil in the U.S. and it is only the government that is keeping us from getting at it, and on the other, if we begin to run into a problem of availability, science will rush in at the nick of time and save us, are short sighted and ignorant of the realities of the situation.
Not all that uncommon though.