/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11171879
>denying oil industries have an interest in stopping green energy
no but the power company would rather not have nuclear reduce the costs of energy in the way that cereal became nearly free after oil and coal came about
>muh solar panels and oil
okay look

How long does it usually take to "burn" a fuel rod?
Would it be feasible with more smaller power plants instead of few big one like today?

>>9808658
>non-renewable resource
Assuming we drop bitcoin, the next mass extinction will hit before we can run out.

>>7740178
No matter how hard you try you can't get a one and a half ton vehicle up to 50 m/s with less than 1.9 MJ and then you have to keep adding energy every second to compensate for drag and other losses. My motorcycle is far from an engineering marvel and yet uses less than 3.5l/100km, five times less than the ford model T, and the fumes are extremely clean. It also makes significantly more power from just a tenth of the T-s displacement

Why not just use nuclear power?
>energy dense
>doesnt require mass production of panels that use precious metals
>versatile
>developing technology with massive room for growth in efficiency and safety
>can operate during night time or a cloudy day

>>7348944
pic very much related.

>>6452367
>hurr chernobyl
Yes, immature technology is dangerous, but more people have died from environment activists and terrorists than people at chernobyl.

>but i'll just say that it is physically impossible to have a better energy storage medium than gasoline.
Are you dumb?

>If we switch to solar
Oh god, you are dumb... hydro, geothermal and even wind are more efficient than solar. Solar isn't even better for the environment, constructing the thing fucks shit up.

>And since nothing can replace fossil fuels and keep us at this level of luxury, we're boned.
Oh noes, white people are comfortable! This can't go on forever, lets harp on about apocalyptic statements!

No, faggot, we're not boned and we'll use people smarter than both of us put together to ensure we maintain this level of luxury. Humans are greedy, more than that they hate losing things and do whatever they can to ensure they regain what they lose.

>The oil will run out
No, it won't.

We're burning something like billions of years of biomatter. Do you have any fucking idea how much that is? It's a fucking lot, and there's oil EVERYWHERE, in deserts, under the sea, there's even oil in Antarctica. It's not "running out" we've simply exceeded how much we can physically extract compared to how much we're actually using. This is the REAL reason oil prices are rising, not because it's "running out," that's fucking stupid, oil is a viscous material, an oil site "runs out" people freak out, abandon it, come back in a few decades and low and behold it's all back!

Fucking billions of years worth of biomatter. Do you have any fucking idea how big a "billion" is? It's fucking huge

>As you grow up you'll realize that star trek isn't going to happen.
>grow up
You tire me.

Don't pretend you're more mature than me, don't pretend you have anything I don't have. You've ate some greenie propaganda and you're prancing around as if it's true.

I don't like fossil fuels because it's so inefficient it's comical

>>6221791

It's not an area I have cared to think to much about. Perhaps I should focus more attention to it but it still strikes me as relatively low importance.

Just going by sheer volume of things nuclear waste doesn't come close to touching other industries. We could take all of the waste from across the globe and dump them into the tar sands in Canada with plenty of room to spare.

>>6146884

this makes a pretty strong case IMO