What Do We Think About Climate Change

[Meanz Beanz]

I think her father is a nuclear tech/scientist or some such thing. She is quite possibly well placed to know. Thank goodness Russia is make a $ these days and can afford to fix it up

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by Aethelwulffe

Water is a waste product of a reaction of hydrogen and oxygen, not a fuel. That car has the same system I built into the picnic baot I built. It is a Hydride-fueled car that uses water in the reaction. It is what is called a "hydrogen on demand" system. In boats it is nifty. The system we used (in conjunction with a fuel cell stack and an asymetrical wound motor, controller etc) takes borax, uses it in a reaction to create hydrogen as it is needed. Later you can (guess what) plug the system in, reverse the process and create boarax again, re-cycling it. Basically, all it is is another battery. The cool part is that your range is only limited as to how much borax you can carry. In a car, that stuff gets heavy, but a boat can carry all the gear neccessary for the system. You don't need a humoungumugigantic super frigidare cryotank full of highly dangerous liquid hydrogen. Just a little bitty one, and a whole bunch of TIDE laundry detergent (well pure powdered borax). Yep, that is the catch. It doesn't run on water anymore than a car that uses water in the coolant system does. They are full of poo and should be shot for screwing with peoples minds when they are so full of mis-information anyway.

Hydrogen on Demand
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sho...23&postcount=3
hydrogen powered marine engine

[Meanz Beanz]

Thx Brian...

[Aethelwulffe]

Coal plants, clean coal plants and the mining associated with them is far far more toxic and much more higher volume than the same industry as it supports the production of electricity from nuclear power. Citing reported statistics: "Waste created by a typical 500-megawatt coal plant includes more than 125000 tons of ash and 193000 tons of sludge from the smokestack scrubber each year."

Nuclear plants release no (measurable) radioactive material into the environment. The whole idea is to keep it in. Here are the stats for what we have released from coal plants into the atmosphere as ash that settled onto the surrounding countryside:

U.S. release (from combustion of 111,716 million tons):
Uranium: 145,230 tons (containing 1031 tons of uranium-235)

Thorium: 357,491 tons

Worldwide release (from combustion of 637,409 million tons):

Uranium: 828,632 tons (containing 5883 tons of uranium-235)

Thorium: 2,039,709 tons

This it taken from a government study that is researching the best ways to refine uranium and other metals (mercury, aluminum, lead, and lots of others) that are present in coal ash.
Mind you, coal scrubbers now remove 95%+ percent of the ash from the exhaust, but it is placed into ponds at the plant, not contained as radioactive material. You WILL get a good reading at the average coal power plant, and if coal plants had to folow the same guidelines for radioactive material release that nukes do, they could not operate, and everyone there would need to wear dosimeters. Imagine taking a mountain of coal and reducing it to ash. Think about what you will find in that pile of ash after it is reduced in that manner.
I'm not even going to start on bituminous coal.

[Aethelwulffe]

Yeah, good links Brian. I had not seen these guys before, but I think a customer of mine has.

[safewalrus]

With some seven nuclear plants within two miles of me neither of my two heads have ever complained - don't need any lights either - the way we glow!!

[the1much]

i'd rather be next to the plant where they have all kinds of watching eyes,,,,,unlike 2/3rds of their dumps

[Aethelwulffe]

I'd like to hear what plants in the US or Europe someone considers to be sub-standard and why, and exactly...in engineering terms... how radiation of radioactive material can/will escape from it. Those that would like to believe they have a case for this, in all the years of yelling "deathtrap!" have yet to provide a scenario that can lead to this.

Kind of like any line of ignorance, superstition, or fearmongering, you can tell all the world that ghosts exist, you can get your cousin to agree that you all saw one, but you still cannot produce one or come up with either evidence or even a plausible testable theory based in other science of what one might be.

For someone to prove they have ground to stand on, all they have to do is provide directions/map to that ground. The directions will gladly be followed and the landmarks documented. If the ground is there, you will have gained a dedicated convert to your side. This attitude has altered my life several times. A successful year is one in which one of my more basic assumptions about the universe I live is is challenged and debunked. I can then feel like I have learned and grown. I feel like while I will never achieve much on the grand scheme, I will still have the pride of knowing I always moved forward.

[masalai]

To my mind, it is not the plant per-se, but the disposal afterwards of active waste products....

[tinhorn]

Originally Posted by Aethelwulffe

I'd like to hear what plants in the US or Europe someone considers to be sub-standard and why, and exactly...in engineering terms... how radiation of radioactive material can/will escape from it. Those that would like to believe they have a case for this, in all the years of yelling "deathtrap!" have yet to provide a scenario that can lead to this.

I'm afraid that's not the point. Anarchists hiding behind green banners and feel-good smokescreens stir up the populace with their fearmongering, and then tie up projects with frivolous lawsuits. I've seen it even on a local small-town level. Some local prick real estate attorney (with a wife on the city council and tens of millions of dollars of properties) has created a high-sounding activist group in my small town that can be counted on to oppose any significant housing development here. Step back, and it's easy to see the con job, but if I golfed with this dude, attended the same Rotary Club meetings, and got a few good investment tips from him, I'd probably get myself sucked into his ********, too. (Funny, his wife claimed to know nothing about "his" investments, and so could be trusted to vote PURELY in the best interests of the city. Hahahahaha! And people BOUGHT it!)

It's all smoke and mirrors, friend. Smoke and mirrors.

[tinhorn]

Originally Posted by masalai

To my mind, it is not the plant per-se, but the disposal afterwards of active waste products....

Yup, more fear-mongering. My region was one of three finalists several years ago for a long-term storage facility. I got involved, and could find nothing wrong with the proposed storage here. (Deep basalt tunnels, backfilled with concrete as the waste was stored.) A geologist I chatted with at one meeting disagreed with me - he said that the salt flats were better suited. He said they were self-healing. A tunnel would close in on itself, sealing the waste forever.

I think there are safe methods of long-term storage available to us, but then if we actually RESOLVED the dilemma, what would college professors and unemployable activists do?

[the1much]

the problem with the waste,,,is your counting on a private company to do it the right way,,,kinda like the counting on the oil industry to do their job right.,,,,in maine when i opened my boat shop,,you have to hire a company ( there was 3 in maine) to remove your waste,,,but,,,,,the state also made you sign a piece of paper saying that if the company (which has been approved by the state) didnt dispose of the material the right way,,,and was later found,,,that i had to pay my part(x number of $'s for every drum) for the clean up,,,,which,,,was WAY higher then to have it taken away in the first place,,,,but anywho,,,,,why do ya think the state would do that?,, think they had confidence in a company to do it right,,,and didnt want to pay the bill, for approving a dumb@ss private company?.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,same thing goes for nuclear waste to,,,,,a privately owned company is in charge,,,,,,and we all know a company wouldnt take short cuts to boost profits.,,,,,,,,,just like tinz council woman making some extra income for her husband.now dont worry,,,,agreeing that companies DO take short cuts wont mean your in the fear from all the mongering group,,hehe

[tinhorn]

That's a valid point, alright. I'd have faith in the military after seeing the job they've done across the state line destroying old, unstable mustard gas and all kinds of scary nasty stuff stored barely underground since WWII. They've had to work with leaking containers and all manner of potential disasters. But I don't think we want the military moving into civilian ventures.

I live near a "nuclear reservation". Don't know what all secret stuff they do there, but it was where research took place for the first atomic bombs. I would trust those government contractors to move the waste. Heck, those companies deal with it every day, and I bet they'd be under close scrutiny every inch of the trip. You'd certainly need escorts, so it wouldn't be like one truck driver, or one dispatcher, could pull a fast one. In the 20+ years I've lived here, I've read of a few minor incidents, but never read of anything endangering the public. And the transport plans of 20 years ago called for massive, indestructible containment packages.

Damn. Mustard gas, unstable secret chemical weapons, and nuclear materials. And I'm downwind from both sites. I'd maybe get nervous if I thought about this more.

[tinhorn]

Originally Posted by the1much

in maine when i opened my boat shop,,you have to hire a company ( there was 3 in maine) to remove your waste

You had WASTE?! Tsk, tsk. I just made weights. Y'know, a plastic bucket full of resin and gelcoat and small 'glass scraps to put in the back of pickups in winter. I never had any waste. Even acetone turns into a solid when it absorbs enough catalyzed resin, and is the perfect addition to weights.

Sometimes the pickup weights market would nosedive and I'd have to dispose of surplus inventory. But there was no problem throwing inert plastic products into the dumpster.

[the1much]

the scary thing tinz,,,is they DO move it by truck,,,1 truck at a time,,no escort,,they TRY to do it by rail because its safer,,,but,, 90% of the time they move it by truck,,,everyday trucks,,nothing special bout them,,and no escorts,,,,,,they did a discovery channel thing on it a few months ago.
and i used to get "picked up" once a month,,,and always had a barrel each, and starting on 2cnd barrel by the time they emptied me.,,,,i had a little too much to use as weights,,,,,that and was "watched" all the time,,,,so it was jus easier doing it the RIGHT way,,hehe