/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10945057
Semen... just wait and see man. Make kids, enslave them, have them carry you everywhere, also they could do all your farming and sustain themselves, you and your harem of women. The future is bright.

>>10945057
Fixed.

>>10945324
Now if we could just evolve the ability to survive nuclear explosions and deadly doses of radiation it might make sense to drive around in nuclear reactors.

>>10945335
It's simple. We uh, use thorium.

>>10945335
Or maybe, just maybe..
>have nuclear power plants
>charge electric cars
>meanwhile, continue to develop newer, safer, more sustainable, higher-density battery technology
>everything went better than expected!

>>10945358
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=568iDYn8pjc

>>10945057
Use nuclear energy to synthesize methane or other short hydrocarbons. Energy densities and simplicity of gas with efficiency of nuclear. Use renewable excess to make more fuel.

>>10945365
Nice idea, but the main reason it'll never fly is the danger that some jackasses will steal the thorium out of people's cars to use in dirty bombs. Then there's all the people with their irrational fears of anything with the word 'nuclear' in it. You could design the engine such that the thorium is literally welded inside a box so thick and dense that it'd take days to cut it out and still no one would go for it. Sad, really.

Power everything with electrical engines. Power the electricity with Nuclear Fusion.

>>10945374
the video is by a nuclear chemist that's worked in multiple nuclear power stations breaking down what a large amount of bullshit the idea is.

>>10945057
What is your application?

Energy density means little if your feedstock material is located close by. The practical reality of these things is much more complex when you get into the details.

>>10945515
>what is your application
Everything. Put a nuclear fusion reactor in the center of every city in the world, everyone has power with little loss due to transmission. Send me a nobel prize in the mail okay.

>>10945521
You realize you need a heat transport system to create electricity right?

The solution is something like:
- use unclear power.
- Use electric cars for short-medium ranges
- Use biofuels cars for long range (perhaps a hybrid)

>>10945057
Antimatter, instead of 140Mj/kg, its 89 billion Mj/kg. Uranium/Plutonium is 80 million Mj/kg. Fusion of 2Helium/3Helium has ~340 million Mj/kg

>>10945381
> electrical engines

>>10945521
I trust nuclear powerplant workers probably even less than psychologists.

Hydrinos

>>10945361
Why do hippies hate nuclear energy so much?

>>10945966
most schizo post of /sci/ today

>>10945057
consuming less

>>10945057
Deuterium.

>>10946027
It is a relief to finally recieve the recognition I am due.

More seriously though it would be nice if those plant workers could stop the radiation getting out all the time but they can't. You can't guarantee your nuclear warheads will produce energy for their lifetime instead of just killing us all.

That is why we don't want nuke stations. You could sell me on a few LFTRs. In a decade or two. When they work properly. By which time we will have fusion anyway and can start building fusion plants.

Unless we spent all our money on a bunch of fucking fission plants you goddamned moron.

t.schitzo

>>10945057
it looks like lithium borohydride is the best mix of energy per weight and volume, unless you have fuckhuge power plants. It sounds expensive as fuck, though

>>10946193
you didn't have to sign off schizo, the post itself clearly is. we'll likely have neither of those in a decade or two, and our nuclear power will still be perfectly safe, as it is right now.

>>10945324

>>10946002
You mean Congress?

>>10945374
Didn't watch the vid, so don't know if relevant. But why use thorium in a car? Just have it on the grid, have cars use fuel cells or lithium ion batteries. Maybe in a few special cases vehicles could use natural gas for commercial/industrial. Even then there's no reason all forklifts shouldn't be electrical.

>>10946626
Congress doesn't hate nuclear energy, they're just paid a lot of money by hydrocarbon people, so they love fossil fuels much much more, plus the general pop is terrified of it so right now it's easy for them to accept fossil fuel as the main stay. Once climate problems reach crisis proportions and it's 30 years too late, they will start to embrace nuclear.

>>10945057
Nothing beats a propane grill.

>>10945335
>he thinks dropping a uranium sample on the floor triggers a nuclear explosion
3.5 rentgen amirite herp derp xDDDD

Nuclear is only financially viable in state controlled grids, unfortunately this will never happen in the US because MUH SOCIALISM so nuclear will remain a meme forever in the US

>>10946648
>Humans wreck world with carbon
>Oh noez look wat we done we needz moar emergy
>Humans wreck world even more with nuclear
>Goes extinct, along with everything else bigger than a mouse.

>>10946592
Shill away brother. Nobody is buying your wares.

>>10946692
I'm talking about crashing a nuclear reactor in use in your car into another one on the road in a 100km/h collision, not dropping a uranium sample on the ground. Try reading things first to figure out the context of someone's statement.

>>10946721
>>Humans wreck world even more with nuclear
Heh, I see you’ve watched “Chernobyl” as well. 3.6 roentgen am I right my fellow intellectual? xD

It's pretty hilarious, after Vogtle if you approach investors about a nuclear project you'll get literally laughed out of the room.

>>10947521
>you’ve watched “Chernobyl”
I have not

I'm just fully aware of how stupid self proclaimed "intellectuals" and nuclear shills really are - and I wouldn't trust them to manage a lemonade stand let alone a nuclear power plant.

I don't understand why can't we create energy from water? H20. Oxygen mixed with hydrogen. Sounds explosive/

>>10947530
FREE hydrogen and oxygen is explosive. Water is what they turn into when they explode. You have to put the energy back in to break them up and make them explode again.

>>10947068
>what are France, China, Canada, and a cluster of other minor nations

>>10947542
But water is free. You don't need to create it.

>>10947543
Good. This will fund the development of small portable reactors which are needed for our plans in space. Just don't be thinking they will be built anywhere important. Like my country. Or yours.

>>10947453
Still no explosion. Get educated, Greenpeace cuck.

>>10945324
Transport is necessary for everything you do, eat, inhabit, move through, etc. Building nukes on wheel (possibly crashing explosively) is not an option. Maximum utility energy dense source for day to day transport is oil. Nucular has some applications (project orion, subs, carriers...)

>>10947686
EV's are already better in 90% of use cases, only issue is cost right now.

>>10947719
Where are you going to get the electricity for your EV? Coal? Natural gas?

>>10946193

So since more radiation is released from any fossil fuel power plant AND nuclear is the safest method of energy production (Chernobyl, TMI, and Fukushima included) will you support nuclear power as a solution to literally every energy problem except fusion taking too long?

>>10947530
Pretty sure we can.

>>10947730
wind and solar are cheaper than ever, EV's compliment renewable sources incredibly well as most people aren't driving during peak production.

>>10947758
No. I like my idea better. It makes fresh water and can green the desert. I want an ice age. I don't like people. I just want a catastrophe which I can survive.

>>10947758
ya its all good till someone falls asleep on the job.
then CABOOM. Sorry this land is now uninhabitable for 1000 years.

Take your beloved economic growth and shove it, faggot.

>>10947802
Do you honestly think you can charge every single electric vehicle with solar and wind? What happens when everyone comes home from work and charges their car at night? Do you have any idea what that would do to the grid?

>>10947863
Yes very easily, solar and wind have absolutely no problem generating massive amounts of power extremely cheaply, the main issue is intermittency which has to be solved with storage which is expensive. EV's with intelligent charging stations are an incredibly powerful tool to balance grid load with production.

>>10947863
I have a better question mr small mind. Why do people live so far from their place of employment. Why is town planning so poor. Why are you determined to support destructive consumerism when that is the root problem.

Energy supply is not the root cause of these issues. Energy consumption is. Inefficiency for the sake of profit is. Open your mind. Look deeper.

>>10947876
>storage
Look at where lithium ion batteries are: >>10945057

>>10947878
>Inefficiency for the sake of profit
You've got it backwards. The alternative to "inefficient" energy consumption is slavery, which less efficient and humane than the consumption of fossil fuels.

>>10947884
What's your point? Energy density isn't very important when your batteries are sitting in a shed.

>>10947453
Literally who would want nuclear powered cars? Centralize the nuclear power, use batteries for cars.

>>10947894
My point is it's pointless trying to scale such a shitty technology for global consumption. Do you have any idea how much fucking lithium you would need to replace every single vehicle on earth with an EV as well as creating sufficient storage for renewable energy sources? How are you going to transport that lithium?

>>10946721
Won't happen kiddo. Most animals will die, the earth will be a hollow shell of what it once was, but we'll be living in THORIUM powered air-conditioned domes. As many grilled mushrooms and compressed algae bars as you want. You might not like it but this what peak performance looks like

>>10947904
you can replace every car on the planet with a Tesla with the lithium currently in reserves. (not resources) as for transportation you just use ships and trains like we do right now, it's not hard.

>>10947904
Why do so many people have to drive cars? It's ridiculous.

>>10947891
Nice deflection. Let me point you back on target. Most people are already enslaved. Additionally they have been placed into circumstances which force them to consume even more in order to keep them enslaved. Such as their daily morning and evening commutes.

Answer the questions please. I am not so easily deflected.

>>10947915
>Why do so many people have to drive cars?
You're a total hypocrite if you've ever used a car

>>10947914
>you can replace every car on the planet with a Tesla with the lithium currently in reserves
You can do that exactly once, and then it's gone forever. Not to mention the insane amount of fossil fuels required to move freight via ships and trains.

>>10947930
>Most people are already enslaved.
You're delusional if you think that ceasing the production and use of fossil fuels would liberate us from slavery.

>>10948094
Hmm. Let me just...
>You're delusional if you think that using nukelier would liberate us from slavery or solve the climate crises.

How long would our uranium reserves last if we were to build all these plants you want I wonder. Wait. Nuclear is a fossil fuel? Well, it is non-renewable.