Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:36 PM
 
4,195 posts, read 1,602,221 times
Reputation: 2183

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
Money will find it's way there - IF and when that happens. Any company that can build this stuff perfectly would have contracts from all over the world....for example, military bases in out-of-the-way places and stuff like that.

Silicon Valley (money and brains) would be all over it.

I'm not doubting the technology - just noting that the business, if it exists, must rest on the merits.

One could imagine tiny safe nuke generators running large airliners - cruise ships in the sky!
Bill Gates IS backing one form of thorium reactor, but again im no expert in this and thorium does seem to have at least one issue of certain materials being highly corrosive....
the designers of the aircraft reactor knew the shielding was a long shot..but non-the-less made significant finding in paving the way for safer power
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:41 PM
 
2,899 posts, read 1,872,159 times
Reputation: 6174
I'm anti nuclear power but probably for totally different reasons than 99.7% of you


I have serious worries that in the future our power grid and supply chain will be compromised and the majority of the reactors which don't rely on passive cooling will overheat and melt down. Either when the storage tanks run out of diesel for the backup generators or if they never start up due because they are damaged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:50 PM
 
4,195 posts, read 1,602,221 times
Reputation: 2183
Quote:
Originally Posted by drinkthekoolaid View Post
I'm anti nuclear power but probably for totally different reasons than 99.7% of you


I have serious worries that in the future our power grid and supply chain will be compromised and the majority of the reactors which don't rely on passive cooling will overheat and melt down. Either when the storage tanks run out of diesel for the backup generators or if they never start up due because they are damaged.
you are talking about the current nuclear power plants...thorium is completely different with cooling..and that IS the major issue the need for ACTIVE cooling on standing reactors which should probably be junked
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Eugene, Oregon
11,122 posts, read 5,596,621 times
Reputation: 16596
There are about 450 nuclear power plants in the world and only a small fraction are of the newer and safer thorium types. The one nuclear power plant in Oregon cost $460 million to build and it's estimated that all the expenses of its closing and demolition will cost $230 million. If there was any profit from the electricity produced in its short, 16- year run, those would have been wiped out by the closing costs. I'm sure that the long-term costs will be much more than that estimate.

When you consider the true costs of nuclear energy, that are compounded by waste management, major repairs and perpetual isolation of the plant areas, I think it's just a big money-pit, pulling more resources out of our economy, than it contributes. And if the world's economy crashes, the majority of nuclear plants that require outside power to close down safely, will explode, killing all life on earth. Suppose there's something very dangerous and unplanned in the operation of thorium plants? The nuclear industry does not have a good record for dependability and properly thinking about the future. I don't trust it at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:57 PM
 
4,195 posts, read 1,602,221 times
Reputation: 2183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
There are about 450 nuclear power plants in the world and only a small fraction are of the newer and safer thorium types. The one nuclear power plant in Oregon cost $460 million to build and it's estimated that all the expenses of its closing and demolition will cost $230 million. If there was any profit from the electricity produced in its short, 16- year run, those would have been wiped out by the closing costs. I'm sure that the long-term costs will be much more than that estimate.

When you consider the true costs of nuclear energy, that are compounded by waste management, major repairs and perpetual isolation of the plant areas, I think it's just a big money-pit, pulling more resources out of our economy, than it contributes. And if the world's economy crashes, the majority of nuclear plants that require outside power to close down safely, will explode, killing all life on earth. Suppose there's something very dangerous and unplanned in the operation of thorium plants? The nuclear industry does not have a good record for dependability and properly thinking about the future. I don't trust it at all.
there currently are NO thorium liquid salt reactors online except one coming in Europe, again there are several "flavors" of such reactors each with different pros and cons..im not sure if this "one" is the best or not...but only research thorium reactors exist
https://www.geek.com/science/first-n...nline-1713296/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYxlpeJEKmw

Last edited by elvis44102; 05-06-2019 at 06:05 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 06:39 PM
 
2,899 posts, read 1,872,159 times
Reputation: 6174
Quote:
Originally Posted by elvis44102 View Post
you are talking about the current nuclear power plants...thorium is completely different with cooling..and that IS the major issue the need for ACTIVE cooling on standing reactors which should probably be junked
Ok im listening....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 06:47 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,074,696 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
solar panels are getting more efficient, so even with lower solar energy reaching the panels, they still make power. those big wind turbines need a minimum amount of wind to turn the blades.

When it's 0 degrees out in the Northeast, cloudy, no wind and the utilities are hitting peak demand at 8AM solar and wind are not meeting that demand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 07:04 PM
 
Location: USA
18,499 posts, read 9,170,177 times
Reputation: 8531
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
where wind power is at its most efficient in with small wind generators, ones that can augment the power required to run a house or small business. two or three small, efficient wind turbines can power a house, and be unobtrusive at the same time.


there will come a time when solar panels will be efficient enough to generate electricity just from the energy that is reflected off the moon. how soon i have no idea.
You’re not going to power a house from a small win turbine or *gasp* moonlight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2019, 06:39 PM
 
1,850 posts, read 1,139,609 times
Reputation: 2436
wind power need large areas to generate power, the towers are ugly, and they kill many avian creatures yearly



Too funny. I can see it now..........some oil company flunky in a $3000 suit will stand up in Congress and cry about dead birds. Priceless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2019, 12:29 PM
 
6,348 posts, read 2,903,321 times
Reputation: 7291
A great type of reactor is the fast neutron reactor cooled with liquid sodium. They ran one for 30 years in Idaho with very few problems.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experi...der_Reactor_II


There are two big advantages. It can't melt down and it can burn nuclear waste. I remember writing a paper in high school about how great these reactors would be. They are building a new experimental one called the Versatile Test Reactor (VTR).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:46 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top