/sci/ - Science & Math

Reported for trolling.

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>Nuclear is no different than the dirty power we already use, so why in the hell would we want to use more?

Come now. Let's not embarrass ourselves.

I don't really don't think it would be too bold to say that Earth won't support life forever, regardless of human interference. Better we destroy it ourselves, than getting taken by surprise. Dealing with radiation will prepare us for the only viable long term future that is space fare. The Universe is ripe with power of all sorts. Let's not get religious about which kinds are uncouth and which are kosher.

>>4474977
>Rule 7: Replying to a thread stating that you've reported it or another post is also disallowed—please do not announce your reports.

>>4474991
>I don't really don't think it would be too bold to say that Earth won't support life forever, regardless of human interference. Better we destroy it ourselves, than getting taken by surprise
What kind of reasoning is that? You're going to die some day, so you might as well kill yourself now?

>>4474995
Holy shit. That's the gayest thing in existence.

God, moot is such a collosal faggot.

>>4475001
>Rule 8: Complaining about 4chan (its policies, moderation, etc.) on the imageboards can result in post deletion and banishment.

>>4475004
Call the cops, I don't give a fuck.

>>4475004
nice

>>4475007

ITT: mods being greentards

>>4475010
Back to reddit, faggot.

>>4475013
>ironic
Hipster? Tumblr then.

>Nuclear is no different than the dirty power we already use

That's a lie and you know it. Where are the CO2 emissions from nuclear?

>>4475012
>Doesn't understand ironic shitposting

as of currently nuclear waste isn't a serious problem because we have developed methods to contain it. first we meld into a form similar to a glass, then we seal it away deep within a highly insulated and stable mountain. we have plenty of space to contain all of the depleted nuclear resources, however that space cannot be used for other activities.

as far a for earth itself, plants and animals tolerate and the radiation exposure much better than humans, some fungi can even live completely off the the radiation as energy.

I believe the general thinking is that:
1. humans will die out before it becomes a problem
2. humans will have the technology to deal with it when it does become a problem

>>4474977

>mfw

>>4475016
where is the radiation from oil?

>>4475035

So that's two differences we've agreed on now. Are you going to retract your absurd statement that they are no different?

Isn't there some way of generating electricity from radioactive decay? I thought the Voyager craft used it hence their long lifetime.

We could use the nuclear waste as a source of energy!

Ive noticed that nobody on /sci/ talks about science anymore. Half of this thread is "haha reported, u banned haha, back to reedit" sort of shit. I expected more discussion about nuclear waste. This is just terrible (I understand that this post does not help) but seriously /sci/ has gone down the shitter in the last couple of months. Much worse than I remember.

>>4475080
/sci/ was never good bro

it was always about the lulz and some sweet trolling bro

>>4475073
RTG's, basically radioactive batteries, The last of the material was sent to Mars on the latest Rover

http://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/reports/population
why did so many people leave after 11/11

>>4475089
Skyrim

>>4475089
EK, Harriet, neutrinos slowing down

Fire it into the sun.

IFR and LFTR can burn the waste. It is not a "waste", its a fuel.

>>4475080
Most of the good and competent posters left because of the constant career advice and teenager philosphy spam. While in earlier times religion was the only trolling and it was at least kind of amusing, nowadays more than 80% of /sci/ threads are boring and unintellectual garbage from highschoolers.

>>4475104

this. the waste from a LFTR (and IFR) is safe after 300 years.

>>4475080
>Ive noticed that nobody on /sci/ talks about science anymore
You have to pick the right threads bro.
>http://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/4461897

The thing about /sci/ is though, that they are very defensive when it comes to nuclear power. It's almost dogmatically accepted that it is the best kind of energy. I'm not saying it's not, because it definitely has some advantages (no carbon emissions), but any kind of critical view is mostly scolded.

I'm amazed no one has mentioned the pipe dream of thorium reactors yet.

>>4475111
>>4475104

SIGN THE PETITION:
http://thoriumpetition.com

I should have known the LFTR fanbois would arrive in short order. You all make the damn thing "too good to be true" with your trumpeting about how spectacular it is.

I want to know what's wrong with the technology. Be brutally honest because when you try to sell shit that doesn't stink at all... Noboddy's buying it.

Wow, that's a obvious troll.

6/10, i raged a little

>>4475120

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

See Disadvantages and Design challenges sections.

Nobody knows it yet, OP (ok, the thorium guys know everything, but that is a differnet story).

The Russians put their nuclear waste simply into railroad waggons and transport them to Siberia where they let them stand around.

Most other countries have storage facilities under mountains but they suck really really bad.

We cant shoot it into the sun, because the rocket might explode and then we all get dirty.

I dont know how the US are doing it, but I geuss they simply pour the shit into the Pacific.

>>4475327
>but they suck really really bad.
No they don't... They're safely underground, do you think the waste sits around in open containers making the mountain turn green?

>>4475327
The US stores it underground and onsite at the Nuclear plants

>>4475119 Sign the petition

No.

These petitions are pathetic. They just regurgitate fantasy numbers and anecdotes about how thorium is so great without making a clear point on how to achieve it. They forget to mention that developing these reactors will easily cost billions, I don't think we can afford that right now.

>We want the Government to invest in Generation IV Thorium nuclear power generation. Already we are reliant on other countries and fossil fuels for our survival. We need to meet the energy generation challenge and secure our energy independence. These systems have the potential to satisfy our energy needs with materials from within our own Borders, creating jobs in the process.

I talked with a scientist presenting at the recent APS March meeting. He said that liquid fuel reactors produce tons of tritium that contaminate everything and is nearly impossible to contain, and that he'd rather focus on making solid fuel safe.

>>4475653
Strawman. A proposed 1GW LFTR would produce about 90 grams of tritium a year. Properly designed, the reactor would easily harvest this extremely valuable side product, which goes for $30,000 a gram to researchers and for glow-in-the-dark signage.

>>4475693
And you're saying those 90 grams of tritium do not pose a contamination problem? Hydrogen isotopes tend to say "fuck you" when you try to contain them with petty things like solid walls.

>>4474965 Nuclear is no different than the dirty power we already use, so why in the hell would we want to use more?

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

They <span class="math">have[/spoiler] figured out how to build plants that won't destroy everything, they're called nuclear reactors that aren't from the fucking 1960's.

There's no way nuclear 'waste' will sit around doing nothing for over 9000 years. It will be used to fuel future reactors when the time is right.

>>4475746

> Implying tritium isn't fucking vital to a shit-load of medical technology.

>>4475073

> Isn't there some way of generating electricity from radioactive decay?

That's the only way, actually.

>>4475630

> We spend trillions
> Can't afford billions with an obvious ROI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reprocessing#List_of_sites

The main question is: if every nuclear plant were to blow up right now, how badly irradiated would the planet be?