/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3900126
it's fun to posit this logo to nuclear energy antagonists, and then follow up with "what does the sun do?"

>>3900136
Rickover was kind of dick. He basically built the nuclear navy which i have great respect for, but he was bullheaded and had a bad habit of using his influence to remove opponents or dissenters.

>>3900085
it's kind of hard to get something like this started, since it's one of those "disruptive technologies" that changes the game

it's been virtually off the map from the late 70s until 2006

there's no conspiracy or anything, it's just that energy companies don't want to take the risk, and traditional nuclear is very very well established and a safe bet.

also the public hates the word nuclear in any context so good luck getting the NIMBYs on board.

basically a really well funded upstart needs to make a prototype reactor in some other country so the NRC cant cockblock it, and then generate public interest from the prototype's success.

>>3899999
i really don't like that image, it's sort of misleading and doesn't give any solid reasons for the bullet points listed
for instance "air cooled" is sort of misleading, they mean compressed helium.

i know they're trying to keep it easy to understand, but you lost so much information when you do that. better to take a little more time to explain the underlying concepts so people really get why it's awesome

>>3900059
it already is, you just kind of have to dig for it.
>>3900065
once they get a solid reactor design, i'm sure we'll share it with our awesome Ausbros
Germany doesn't get one though, they banned everything nuclear remember? heh

>>3900049
you absolutely need to go to college for that. go all the way for a phd

>>3900021
i'd say invest in that startup company, FLIBE energy, who will put it to good use

>>3900028
also that design kind of sucked since it keeps the Pa233 flying around, which can undergo a parasitic neutron reaction and breed MORE U232, which makes your fuel salt mix hideously gamma radioactive

>>3900000
nice qints
you don't remember this? it's half the reason i got a trip in the first place

i even made some crude diagrams for fun. this was before i realized for much fuel salt i would need, and that the critical mass of U233 was actually kind of big, the smallest i'd be able to make would be like a 100Mw plant

i didn't actually spend any money or anything, but i spent a solid month planning things out. Made a call to the nrc about how it would legally work out, they basically require 20 years to start any kind of nuclear reactor (before any construction), mostly design approval and shit.

a few people had tried to do it on the down-low. one of them blabbed about it to friends and got arrested by the fbi (thought he was making weapons material). another guy got horribly radiation poisoned because he didn't know about u232, and the third guy got arrested as well.

it's not worth it. Advocacy is the way to go

>>3899989
no
the U232 contamination will kill you as well unless you've got a multi million dollar breeder setup with robotic handling equipment

on an enterprise level, a LFTR plant is a bargain. on a backyard level? way too expensive and deadly

>>3899995
actually the biggest problem is the breeding setup for the initial U233 stock. that shit could _easily_ be used to breed sub-weapon's grade plutonium

very hard to come by, extremely expensive

and no, you should not try to make one in your backyard. the hastelloy alone would probably eat through your budget, the nuclear-grade graphite core will cost about as much as your car, and the fluorine will probably kill you and ruin your equipment

trust me
i tried it

>>3898860
which is why i said almost
i suspect independent confirmation might take a few years of shooting particles though

>>3898841
>waiting for someone to replicate it with different machines to be sure there aren't errors that haven't been found
looking at the data, and the various attempts they did to violate their own data (make sure it's legit), i'm almost convinced of their findings
almost

i believe the current state of affairs is

>neutrinos do indeed travel faster than light
>something like .0012% faster
>this does not violate relativity
>this will not lead to time travel or warp engines or whateverthefuck
>this DOES promote some very interesting questions as to the nature of neutrinos, which are frankly kind of mysterious

>>3898812
>explosion yields a portal

>>3898803
>flash of time travel

god damnit

>>3897213
it's not too difficult to have a water repulsion system in a molten salt reactor.

wait, is someone going to make a tier list now

>>3895504
eeeh
i'm not too hopeful about that, it makes some nasty ass waste products and heat is only one of quite a few complex steps

large scale desalination seems more useful

magnetized target fusion
look it up

it's pretty early stuff at the moment, but looking at the straight up numbers, it seems relatively feasible.

>>3895467
>Another prime example is biofuels. Instead of growing efficient crops with good net energy ratios we make corn ethanol which just barely yields a net gain in energy and raises the price of food as an extra malus.
cool story; brazil has a fucking fantastic biofuel economy, they use sugar cane since it can grow basically anywhere and the energy content is pretty damn good.
the whole country runs on the stuff, and it's fucking _cheap_

>>3895451
entire swaths of college campuses that think The China Syndrome was a documentary

normally very intelligent physics or math majors who basically devolve into "chernobyl killed millions" when the nuclear question is raised

PROFESSORS who do SERIOUS RESEARCH into alternative energy projects that don't know what radiation actually fucking is, and think it's legitimate a green glow

i've
seen
some
shit

>>3895437
> My post was meant to show what will happen if renewables dont succeed in powering humanity despite the large subsidies.
well, the problem is that people will just lobby for more research into it
everyone has this really intense boner for wind and solar, it doesn't seem to be subsiding any time soon

>The only thing allowing anti-nuclear movement to exist currently is cheap fossil fuel energy.
you are severely underestimating the power of stupid, frightened people in large voting groups.
i've seen some shit man, i've seen some shit

>>3895423
yeah, it is the opposite of america sadly
and damnit if i don't love this burning ship full of fat people and retards
gettin' all choked up here!

>>3895393
>moving to france
not a bad plan
they're about to get some good income from germany which shut down all their nuclear power plants due to the insane green movement within the country following fukushima.

'course it's hard to run a country when a big chunk of your power base just went dark, and you're forced to spend untold billions on shitty wind farms

importing the juice from frame (85% nuclear) seems to be the option they're going for

france'll probably sit in its chair, counting bills saying "suckers"