/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3895372
no, the pro-solar and pro-wind movement will just gain more steam (and government subsidies)

i like solar, long term, like 20 years down the road. right now it's sort of clunky
fuck wind forever, not viable large scale

>>3895375
i meant more like off the grid power, since grid maintenance is kind of an expensive thing for everyone involved
by water cracking i assume you mean getting hydrogen for fuel cells. that's another one of those "down the road" things.

>>3895358
i'm probably just letting political prejudice influence me too much, but i have rarely if ever come across someone who supports alternative energy as well as nuclear power. it's almost mutually exclusive


>>3895360
first one?
for grid and industrial power, sure, but not entirely
second one?
war, war never changes....
third one?
quite true. all dat thorium on the moon man, mars too.

>>3895351
that might work, but it's still be incredibly heavy and hard to move, better to use nuclear aircraft carriers to be honest. the reactors in those vessels are rock-fucking-solid, and the crew trained to operate them have ice in their veins

>>3895348
The NRC cockblocking it
NIMBYs sueing anyone and everyone who tries it for any charge they can think up
greenies standing around the construction site in a hippie commune
trying to raise money from congress people who want to look good for votes, and "funding nuclear power" is political suicide

>>3895332
i'd buy you a beer if i met you in a bar, bro. you're a very rare breed

>>3895314
>landships
sounds somewhat impractical, a good bit of tank combat is based around maneuverability, as far as i know

>>3895217
>tanks
no, that's too small.
keep in mind that thorium (specifically U233) has a critical mass just like everything else. And you're only putting .03% U233 in your fuel salt mix, so you kind of have a minimum fuel salt amount to work with.

MSRE was tiny by lftr standards, probably about as small as you can get.

>>3895202
oh, skepticism is understandable really.
and to be honest, lots of the thorium supporters on here don't seem to really consider the cost/benefit analysis of the thing, mostly just quoting kirk sorensen's presentation ever now and again, it's a little irritating.

i think some people are getting a little too excited

>>3895213
possibly, it'd certainly be safe and compact enough, but your shielding will be very fucking heavy

>>3895176
oh, and if you look at pictures of the graphite core, the thing could probably fit in the back of a pickup. now that's hot

>>3895123
7.4 megawatts thermal, not nearly commercial power plant level, but still pretty crazy given how tiny the entire thing was.

>>3895054
it is kind of uncanny, isn't it?
but we're basically just listing off features the MSRE employed, and that ran fine for a couple years already soooo....

but please, bring to bear some serious flaws in the design. there are a few, i'm wondering if you're even aware of them

>>3895035
the worst part is that he's completely right
except for
>cannot be fully accepted
doesn't really need to be "full" accepted, just accepted enough that the retards no longer have enough power to deny it

>>3894832
at the plant itself? probably a decent bit, and it'll take a few years at least
the area around it? it's fine for habitability right now, but for the sake of precaution they're keeping people out while they do soil samples and stuff. there really isn't much contamination to be worried about

>>3894726
>Two, all of two fucking people got radiation sickness, and they didn't even die from it.
They might get cancer later, shock.
probably not. those two workers are being used as some magical statistic to cause more hype

here's what happened
Two workers were turning connections on in the basement of the plant, they were ankle-deep in some water they didn't know was emitting beta radiation rather severely. They got radiation burns on their ankles, went to a local hospital, were treated, probably threw up a few times, but were released with a clean bill of health two days later

their chances of getting cancer are actually very low, since that's often caused by low long term doses instead of quick ones

>>3894691
>The the hydrogen buildup exploded, proving the fuel casings had melted through.
what? no, there was never a melt-through. there was a melt DOWN, but that's different. and the fact the fuel rods completely melted but there wasn't anything more than a hydrogen explosion that blew off tertiary containment is a testament to the reactor's design.
A hydrogen explosion does not equal a melt through, you might want to read the accident reports before accusing people of downplaying things

by the way, we really weren't far off. the radiation levels did go up but then started going back down, but you haven't heard anything about that have you? disasters become less interesting when recovery is occurring.

the exclusion zones around the plant are being slowly lifted, and radiation has been back down to background levels since like, September

it isn't that bad, it never was.

>>3894705
i'm honestly concerned about how many babies were forcefully iodine overdosed by panicking mothers.
god damn media bullshit

>>3894671
sweet thanks, i signed it

>>3894636
what are some fake towns i can put in there to fake being a uk citizen

>>3894635
go watch a newscast about fukushima, that should really put things in perspective.

but the major ones are
>nuclear energy is incredibly unsafe and any accidents are covered up by governments
>nuclear waste will seep out of any container its put in, sneak into your house and strangle your children
>anything any expert ever says about nuclear power is false because they're being paid off by the government

>>3894615
the fireball reactor was never going to be in an airplane, that was mostly just a goofy way for weinburg to get funding to build more reactors

seriously, the shielding necessary to protect the reactor would weigh several times more than the entire plane

>>3894609
>"the public hates thorium for no reason at all!"
no, the public hates nuclear energy for reasons which are usually false or myths
they cannot distinguish between different types of nuclear energy

>>3894582
did i mention how public opinion is a huge obstacle?
yeah

>>3894571
those don't spread nearly well enough. you basically have to break the general populace out of the american idol-Call of duty-michael bay trance and make them think critically for more than half a minute

it's extremely difficult.

>>3894544
the filthy liberals are reasonable enough, they're just terribly misinformed and have very deep baises mostly due to being misinformed

but any kind of mass education effort would need to evolve naturally from a starting event, something viral that isn't government run or sponsored will have the most impact.

problem is, forcing a viral event is impossible