Batteries and New Battery Technologies

[sdowney717]

never been a natural discovery of concentrated power grade radioactive fuel

yes, there was a long time ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural...ission_reactor

besides that there is an ongoing currently today nuclear reaction deep in the earth which creates the molten core.

Just because it is natural wont make it safe.
Who knows but those condition theoretically might reoccur. Consider if some kind of massive mega volcano errupts and brings radioactive elements together in such a way as it happened before. Very unlikely the same conditions, but who knows what the future could bring. Perhaps a disaster movie will be made about something like this.

[Jeremy Harris]

Originally Posted by sdowney717

Just because it is natural wont make it safe.

No, just like pretty much any other natural thing we dig up out of the earth and use for our own ends it presents risks. We deal with highly toxic and dangerous materials every day, from oil-based products, coal and it's associated waste, toxic metals and ores mined and extracted all over the globe to the massive toxic waste output of global manufacturing industry.

There are many toxic substances at least as dangerous and long-lived as some radioactive materials used to generate power, and what's more, they are often produced and disposed of in massively greater quantities. Where I used to live there are large areas of barren rocky ground with little growing on it. These wastelands were created from spreading waste contaminated with very high levels of lead, copper, antimony and arsenic over thousands of acres a few hundred years ago, when tin and other metals were mined there. A friend who ran a children's play group had to get her play ground area dug out and taken away as toxic waste and fresh soil put in, as the kids got sick from arsenic poisoning. That toxin had been in the soil for at least 200 years, maybe more.

The total volume of waste material from the nuclear industry is tiny in comparison to, say, the volume of toxic waste produced from mining, or even oil extraction. I'm not disputing the high toxicity or long life of radioactive waste, but we do need to get the risks from it into perspective with all the other forms of long-lifetime pollution we generate.

Jeremy

[JosephT]

Great discussions here. I 2nd the notion to create a dedicated forum (versus a thread) for this growing topic. All things solar/battery & electric motor should be included.

There is a new form of solar technology referred to as "nantennas", which are a new nano-technology antenna type solar panel that is flexible. Unlike conventional solar panels they are around 90% efficient (yes, 90%). The remaining nuts to crack are converting the captured energy for use via a rectifier/diode, in addition to scaling up the production process. The rectification of the energy is the toughest nut to crack with any of this technology.

http://www.inl.gov/pdfs/nantenna.pdf

Interesting stuff that will no doubt be impacting future power systems.

[portacruise]

Originally Posted by sdowney717

yes, there was a long time ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural...ission_reactor

besides that there is an ongoing currently today nuclear reaction deep in the earth which creates the molten core.

Just because it is natural wont make it safe.
Who knows but those condition theoretically might reoccur. Consider if some kind of massive mega volcano errupts and brings radioactive elements together in such a way as it happened before. Very unlikely the same conditions, but who knows what the future could bring. Perhaps a disaster movie will be made about something like this.

Appreciate that information on surface natural fission. Yes, anything is possible going backward or forward to infinity of time. I never have believed "natural" makes anything safe, but we may not have control of that as humans. Consider a "natural" asteroid could hit at any time and end this silly discussion- already a subject of several movies. Humans can control and improve how their "non natural" high level nuclear is dealt with....

P.

[portacruise]

Yes, of course there are risks with raw materials that are dug up and disposed of. There are also risks of starvation, disease, etc. if such things are not done! These conventional hazards can be cleaned up and improved by conventional chemical means- with considerably less risk and cost, IMHO. Progress has been made on the processes for conventional sources to make them safer and more economical, even though we inherited a bad situation.

The exposure tolerance with immediate contact would be longer and the toxic longevity shorter compared to nuclear. Chernobyl will have to be sealed off and guarded forever, AFAIK, and what is the $ cost of that?

I understand your point of view. Even highly touted "green" solar cells has caused pollution fatalities in China where short term $ gain is priority. That can eventually be fixed to keep from further damage to future populations at a reasonable cost. But how do you deactivate fission material? Spread it out as a mist so it becomes background radiation? Throw it into a fusion furnace so it becomes plasma? The volume of radioactive material may be low but when it becomes decentralized in smaller power units as proposed, you get some bigger issues.

P

Originally Posted by Jeremy Harris

No, just like pretty much any other natural thing we dig up out of the earth and use for our own ends it presents risks. We deal with highly toxic and dangerous materials every day, from oil-based products, coal and it's associated waste, toxic metals and ores mined and extracted all over the globe to the massive toxic waste output of global manufacturing industry.

There are many toxic substances at least as dangerous and long-lived as some radioactive materials used to generate power, and what's more, they are often produced and disposed of in massively greater quantities. Where I used to live there are large areas of barren rocky ground with little growing on it. These wastelands were created from spreading waste contaminated with very high levels of lead, copper, antimony and arsenic over thousands of acres a few hundred years ago, when tin and other metals were mined there. A friend who ran a children's play group had to get her play ground area dug out and taken away as toxic waste and fresh soil put in, as the kids got sick from arsenic poisoning. That toxin had been in the soil for at least 200 years, maybe more.

The total volume of waste material from the nuclear industry is tiny in comparison to, say, the volume of toxic waste produced from mining, or even oil extraction. I'm not disputing the high toxicity or long life of radioactive waste, but we do need to get the risks from it into perspective with all the other forms of long-lifetime pollution we generate.

Jeremy

[Jeremy Harris]

The intrinsic problem of dealing with very long-lived toxic materials is pretty much the same for radioactive waste as it is for other toxic elements, like heavy metals. Both need to be kept out of the environment for ever, both present high risks to life if they are allowed to escape into the atmosphere, get into watercourses or whatever.

The difference is that radioactive waste is produced in tiny quantities compared to other equally long lived and toxic materials, but has a bad press because of the nuclear weapons connection. How on earth we can focus so much attention on the risk from radioactive materials, yet seemingly ignore the massively greater risks from other materials used in power generation, and other aspects of modern life, continues to amaze me. For example, compare the publicity that the tiny leaks from Japan have had with the colossal global polluting impact of coal fired power generation. Last time I checked more people were dying every hour from coal related causes than will ever die from the effect of minor radioactive leaks in Japan from the tsunami damage.

Jeremy

[sdowney717]

little talked about, there are natural wild coal fires all over the earth burning and sending massive amounts of pollution into the air. The emissions from these worldwide wild coal fires dwarf anything man makes.
http://news.discovery.com/earth/coal...on-global.html
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com...und-coal-fires

the press wont talk much about this, they would rather talk about man made global warming from cars, trucks, utilities and close the eyes about coal fires.

[portacruise]

Something is better than nothing so long as it is not making things worse. There are scrubbers, catalytic converters and such which have helped with the increased human use of energy and autos. We have cradle to grave legislation in the USA which is helping with the human component, at least in theory. Seems to me the smog in Los Angeles is from man made sources and would be even worse without such action, even considering coal fuel and such. I don't hear much such things on the nuclear waste issues. The volume is small and not to be concerned compared to other problems, will not help when millions of smaller power units get scattered about. That was the original message for my response. Russia is not dealing well with a mini version of this scenario where they have not been able retrieve some of their small remote nuke power weather reporting stations, last I heard..... http://englishrussia.com/2009/01/06/...r-lighthouses/

P

[sdowney717]

Interesting stuff that will no doubt be impacting future power systems.

interesting that nantenna capture infared as well as light. They seem to work by getting hot from sunlight and 90% efficiency.
Could be very cheap to make someday, maybe if they figure it out.
Something like that, if they can figure it out, would be a big seller.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...www.google.com

The idea is to extend this technology to a direct solar facing nantenna device that would, in essence, collect heat and sunlight.

how about exhaust heat or even heat from burning fuel. Makes me think if you could take a burning fuel which makes a lot of heat and capture it directly as electricity, you could then use an electric motor. So bypass steam turbines and go from heat directly to electricity using some sort of device.

[sdowney717]

not a wacky idea apparently being persued now.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0622125706.htm

Generating 'Green' Electricity: Waste Heat Converted to Electricity Using New Alloy

there have always been thermocouples like used in sattelites with radioactive decay generating heat.
how about that for your boat or car.
I read the casks from spent nuclear waste get pretty hot.
a lot of the nuclear energy is still left in the nuclear waste, infact most of it's energy is just thrown away in storage as reprocessing costs are higher than getting fresh material from fuel rod processors. but how about capturing this waste heat instead of 'wasting waste heat'.

[sdowney717]

it is time we look BACK to molten salt thorium reactors.
Which process was abandoned in the USA in favor of LWR reactors that can make plutonium for atomic weapons. Mostly LWR designs were pushed by the us military
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...thorium-power/

frankly I dont understand why the US now has to always play second fiddle regarding progressive technology, such as the hybrid car developed by Japan and now thorium reactors by India and China. Not top mention the pebble bed reactor VHTR designs which are much safer.

I wonder if the entitlement mindset of many in the US is bankrupting the nations future. Not looking to the future and looking to get or steal from others to meet their needs. People just gratifying their needs or wants of the moment.
To me some taxation and government regulation, laws, etc... is in a way stealing. So the incentives to do something here is less than to do something elsewhere.

[Jeremy Harris]

Originally Posted by sdowney717

frankly I dont understand why the US now has to always play second fiddle regarding progressive technology, such as the hybrid car developed by Japan and now thorium reactors by India and China. Not top mention the pebble bed reactor VHTR designs which are much safer.

I wonder if the entitlement mindset of many in the US is bankrupting the nations future. Not looking to the future and looking to get or steal from others to meet their needs. People just gratifying their needs or wants of the moment.
To me some taxation and government regulation, laws, etc... is in a way stealing. So the incentives to do something here is less than to do something elsewhere.

I think there are a host of reasons why the West in general (it's not just the US) aren't at the cutting edge of new technologies in the consumer area.

Legislation and over-regulation is one way innovation gets stifled. Liability is another (look at the collapse of the US light aircraft industry years ago - Piper and Cessna bother ceased making new aircraft designs for a few years because they couldn't get the liability cover - the law had to be changed to get them back trading). The way that the patent system has changed to become unfit for purpose is another reason for the lack of innovation in the West. Finally, I think that virtual collapse of manufacturing industry in the West hasn't helped - with fewer people in the West making things, and more just providing services, inventing and developing new technologies isn't seen as an attractive career path. If you're bright and fresh out of university, are you going to go invent things and earn a pittance or go into something like banking and earn millions?

Jeremy

[sdowney717]

Liability is another

yes, this is part of the you owe me mindset, along with patent trolls.
personally, I think when society allows these things to take place, then you get what we have. Another terrible thing that happened was the loss of our manufacturing base to overseas. A lot of jobs fled the country. I recall at the time, NAFTA, etc.. which all this started under Clinton, how the US would become all high tech and service jobs and how everything was going to be great for Americans. Look how it is turning out now.

You just cant educate every joe to super star status, meaning the average guy is not technically minded enough to work high tech, the average guy is rather someone who needs a steady boring job perhaps a trade or a manufacturing position or selling something or working a counter.

so what we got is a shrinking middle class and fewer people owning more of the wealth and a large growing class of marginal wage earners working service jobs who live paycheck to paycheck with little job security.

[Landlubber]

sdowney717, good comment above mate, and so true.

[Timothy]

The Candu 6 reactor can burn natural uranium or thorium. and produce power more efficiently than any other reactor ( at least that is what is claimed). It can also burn spent fuel. It was developed with billions of dollars of Canadian taxpayers money. The Harper Government in a secret deal just privatized the company for 15 million dollars just as a market in China Argentina and Turkey seems about to develop.