/sci/ - Science & Math

They let schools have reactors? brb, picketing.

Radiation is bad. M'kay

what? you don't need practical equipment to study theory.

I study structural engineering and it's not like they give me a building and some explosives to test its dynamics response to blast loading

>>3915588
it's just the principle of the thing, man
>>3915583
:I

>>3915596
well, it's most likely the way of the future

get around it

>>3915577
>Attending one of the top undergrad engineering schools in the country.
>My school has a nuclear reactor on campus
>U jelly OP?

>>3915587
and expensive.

be in dutch university. technical university. off course there is a reactor. how else do you think the iranians were able to steal the knowledge to build a nuclear bomb?
mfw: Iran know how to A-bomb because of shitty security in the Netherlands.
mfw i have no face.

>>3915614
is it berkeley or UAT

>>3915640
No and no

>>3915633
U hebt wel degelijk een gezicht, mijnheer.

>>3915577
>>3915577
I just have one question. Are you completely fucking retarded op? JOKES. We all know you are. Test reactors are very fucking expensive. Yeah I'm foaming at the mouth mad. Retarded retard OP is.

>>3915577
We've a reactor here at UF. Jelly?

>>3915657
of course they're expensive, i'm just arguing on the principle of the thing, that so few exist in the entire fucking country even at their price.

>>3915645

Oregon State?

>>3915677
>>3915577
Penn State

>Nuclear thread

So naturally this is a German pussies thread?

I can forgive them for genocide of jevvs, but not for caving into fossil fuels and hippy hysteria.

>>3915670
>>3915670
We don't fucking need them. If your work will involve working at an actual reactor, then you will get training anyways there. That's how it is at Hanford, and your logic is flawed.
>while we're at it let's build a huge ass court at every law school
>where do you expect the funding to come from? It's not a matter of principle, it's a matter of common fucking sense. Hur durr I'M STUDYING THEORY IN QUANTAM MECHANICS SO I NEED A MID SCALE REPLICA OF THE LHC BECAUSE IT WILL FURTHER MY EDUCATION BECAUSE IM GOING TO BE WORKING AT THE LHC CUZ I STUDY QUANTUM MECHANICS
wrghghglglglhglhl

>>3915698
it're more an issue of the potential innovation within that field, and even then we're still making light water test reactors almost exclusively, and even THEN only a few schools set aside enough to make one, and even THEN they aren't really allowed to do much testing with them, it's a hot mess all around

If OWS hippies wanted my support, they'd build a micro reactor like OSU's underground 'micro' OSURR.

Also I messed up the jpeg. Wrong OSU.

>>3915705
>>3915705
>complaining about understudies and students not being able to perform extensive tests on reactors and setting that as a standard for education
>ISHYGDDT
Also: fuck you and your ignorance wasting my time posting

>>3915730
>extensive
more like any, at all. and i'm not talking about students dropping sodium into the pot and wondering what will happen, i'm talking about doing something to the rector aside from measure its output and use it as a set piece

Berkeley is really pushing for their very cleverly designed gas and salt cooled modified pebblebed reactor.
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/pb-ahtr/
but it'll probably never be built at any scale in the united states.

>>3915747
>>3915747
I wonder why not.... Those things are very inexpensive and Berkley should build like 10 for less than 30 mil right? You want a college to build a reactor so people can pay to take measurements? Surely The U.S. is the only country that isn't littered with fucking reactors

>>3915763
:I

We don't want the terruhsts to build simple and cheap reactors.

>>3915633

>mfw it's a 70 y/o tech

You don't need to be Einstein to make one

>>3915633
>mijn gezicht wanneer ik me realiseer dat een aanhef "Heren" eigenlijk ongelofelijk baas is.

WAT. I was pretty sure the US had more test/university reactors than that. I got to see this bad boy.

>>3915583
This is a good thing, someone has to provide us with clean, cheap electricity to prevent us from getting irradiated from all the radioisotopes pumped into the atmosphere from the burning of coal. There's more energy in the extreme minute amounts of Uranium in coal than in the carbon in the coal.

In fact, there's roughly 100x as much radiation released from coal than from nuclear plants.

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

>Based on the predicted combustion of 2516 million tons of coal in the United States and 12,580 million tons worldwide during the year 2040, cumulative releases for the 100 years of coal combustion following 1937 are predicted to be:

>Uranium: 145,230 tons (containing 1031 tons of uranium-235)
>Thorium: 357,491 tons

But OH NOOOES, THE RAYDEEAYSHUNS ARE GON' GET US! You get many times the dosage from radon (particularly you basement dwellers) than you do from the background radiation you'll experience from the 145,230 Tons of Uranium (in 26 years, well within the average 4channer's life expectancy), which is, except in extreme cases, STILL a safe dosage of radiation, hell, it might even be helpful.

People, pull your heads out of your asses. All this bullshit about "clean coal" and "natural gas is TEH FUTURE!!1! is just bullshit. We duct the stuff underground, we're leaving massive deposits which can seep into aquifers and poison them for decades. We expand natural gas production, and we hydro-frack ourselves into the same situation, except we include more wonderful mercury and trace heavy metals which according to most state regulation, is perfectly safe to dump into rivers.

This isn't like global warming. These are quantified real problems with little controversy, and with obvious consequences. The reason no one gives a shit is because they either don't know about it, or because they trust the good ol' EPA to do the right thing.

>>3917440

Apparently there are no pics on the net that do it justice.

My university has a test reactor.

>>3915763

DERP. IF they don't build it, it's not because they don't have money, it's because they would get sick of waiting for 10-20 years just to begin construction. No one wants to have a reactor just to take measurements, but students aren't allowed to do actual experiments on reactors because much of that experimentation would have to come with building new or obscure designs. That, and there's plenty of fear out there from what would happen if some student attempted to make a reactor go super critical/melt down.

sup

>>3915583
MIT has a reactor. They also have their own (unrelated) cogeneration electrical plant.

>>3917544

cool, how big is it? MW reactor?

>>3917544
i know MIT has a magnetic confinement fusion reactor, but does it had a traditional light water reactor too?

nuclear power is outdated and unsustainable, renewable technologies are the way forward.

>>3917593
hurr durr

>>3917593

my liberal arts college has a reactor. suck it, engineers

>>3917626
no greenies have tried to suicide bomb it yet?

>>3917626
Reed? I considered going there

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVSmf_qmkbg

Good ol' Kirk Sorensen, always the Thorium doctor. Sounds like a video game villain. DR. THORIUM

>>3915686
am in penn state and nuclear program is shit here
actually all programs are shit here