Nuclear energy on its way out.:)

On Jul 11, 6:14*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb. If you can do one, you can just as easily do the other.
Mook's version of a fusion thruster has an exhaust velocity of 33,000
km/sec, so there's really no telling how much global WMD kind of
trouble we'll all be in when most everyone has access to fusion
energy.

I'd still favor going for it, even though it would be technically
impossible to remote detect a fusion powered WMD that doesn't even
have to be all that large or massive.

“1 kg of lithium-6 deuteride releases 576 trillion joules of energy”

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On 12/07/2011 11:51 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 11, 6:14 pm, Sylvia wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb.

So given that H-bombs already exist, there should be no problem building
fusion reactors.

But there is a problem, so perhaps they're not exactly the same.

Sylvia.

On Jul 11, 7:50*pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/07/2011 11:51 AM, Brad Guth wrote:









On Jul 11, 6:14 pm, Sylvia *wrote:
On 12/07/2011 10:06 AM, Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

A good starting point would be a description of how difficult it's
proved to be to get fusion plants to function even when we want them to,
let alone when we don't

Sylvia.

Any sort of fusion powered source of energy is exactly the same as an
H-bomb.

So given that H-bombs already exist, there should be no problem building
fusion reactors.

But there is a problem, so perhaps they're not exactly the same.

Sylvia.

That's true, because the fly-by-rocket or electrical energy via such
fusion methods of what Mook is suggesting isn't exactly a viable bomb
that can get delivered without such logistics being easily detected
and/or noticed by most anyone. However, constructing a fusion bomb
that's cloaked as a reactor for obtaining clean energy, such as in the
center of any significant city is quite doable, or even as a research
reactor that can ingest a kg of Li6 could prove somewhat problematic
for a very large area.

Perhaps keeping the reactor fuel load down to a maximum of one gram,
and thereby only creating .576e12 joules per fusion jolt might be good
enough, though 58.736e9 kgf is still a worthy reaction blast that
starts off at 33,000 km/sec.

This fusion seems kind of like a precursor to matter and antimatter
that should produce a radial explosion of nearly 150,000 km/sec.

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Sylvia Else wrote:
Richard Stephens wrote:

I wonder what these recent accidents will do to fusion research. Will
the average person think that all nuclear power is the same?

The average person avoids irradiated foods because they are radioactive.
Of course whatever illogical nonsense folks come up with will be what
the average person thinks.

Well, they probably would, but I doubt that matters much as far as
research is concerned. If and when fusion plants were actually being
built around the world, there would have to be some education programs
designed to explain why a fusion plant cannot possibly suffer the kinds
of problem encountered with fission plants.

And don't mention that a lot of the energy is in the form of neutrons
that convert the interior of the reactor to radioactive isotopes. The
solved-but-prevented-by-politics problem of radioactive waste will not
change when we go to fusion.

It's been suggested that the earliest important use of fusion as with a
fusion torch to process nuclear waste from fission - All the way from
the early research through spent fuel rods. One product of such a plant
would be mixed oxides of various transuranics. We still need to build
fission plants with a technology like the Candu heavy water slow
breeders to burn up all that MOX.

On 13/07/2011 12:40 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:

And don't mention that a lot of the energy is in the form of neutrons
that convert the interior of the reactor to radioactive isotopes. The
solved-but-prevented-by-politics problem of radioactive waste will not
change when we go to fusion.

I doubt most people feel that strongly about nuclear waste, as long as
it's not dumped nearby. What they care about are events like Chernobyl,
and now Fukushima. They would need to be assured that even if a fusion
plant is complete wrecked, it still cannot present those kinds of hazard.

Sylvia.

In article d03f4df1-4cc9-42dc-80c9-3f66e2a260b2
@g12g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

Japanese were asked what should be done regarding the nation's nuclear
power plants, 2 percent said more nuclear plants should be built.
Twenty-five percent said they are in favor of the status-quo, while 42
percent said the number of plants should be reduced. Twenty-one
percent said all nuclear power plants should be eliminated.

Basing such important decisions on how the population "feels" about
where they get their power is awfully stupid. Hopefully Japan's leaders
aren't as dumb as the general population.

In any case it will likely take one more nuke plant accident to kill
the entire industry. The companies involved can move to cleaning up
old plants...

You said the same thing repeatedly about the shuttle, now you're crying
because the program is ending!

I have a feeling the Japanese population will feel differently after
they start to see the death toll caused by lack of air conditioning this
summer due to lack of nuclear power. We should keep score here. So
far, zero deaths from radiation. How many deaths due to the heat so
far?

Jeff
--
" Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry
Spencer 1/28/2011

On Jul 12, 2:45*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article d03f4df1-4cc9-42dc-80c9-3f66e2a260b2
@g12g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...



Japanese were asked what should be done regarding the nation's nuclear
power plants, 2 percent said more nuclear plants should be built.
Twenty-five percent said they are in favor of the status-quo, while 42
percent said the number of plants should be reduced. Twenty-one
percent said all nuclear power plants should be eliminated.

Basing such important decisions on how the population "feels" about
where they get their power is awfully stupid. *Hopefully Japan's leaders
aren't as dumb as the general population.

In any case it will likely take one more nuke plant accident to kill
the entire industry. The companies involved can move to cleaning up
old plants...

You said the same thing repeatedly about the shuttle, now you're crying
because the program is ending! *

I have a feeling the Japanese population will feel differently after
they start to see the death toll caused by lack of air conditioning this
summer due to lack of nuclear power. *We should keep score here. *So
far, zero deaths from radiation. *How many deaths due to the heat so
far?

Jeff

well I never thought the shuttle would end with no future program
underway

As for japan once the cancer rates soar nuke power will be killed.

Remember the government and power company understated the radiation
lekage and failed to evacuate residents in a timely fashion. there are
still areas to be evacuated.

I expect the current leaders to be brought up on charges once
residents and espically kids start dying, or even getting cancer

In article 4bf22831-f563-4cf9-8771-48c7db167266
@a10g2000vbz.googlegroups.com, says...

On Jul 12, 2:45*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article d03f4df1-4cc9-42dc-80c9-3f66e2a260b2
@g12g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...



Japanese were asked what should be done regarding the nation's nuclear
power plants, 2 percent said more nuclear plants should be built.
Twenty-five percent said they are in favor of the status-quo, while 42
percent said the number of plants should be reduced. Twenty-one
percent said all nuclear power plants should be eliminated.

Basing such important decisions on how the population "feels" about
where they get their power is awfully stupid. *Hopefully Japan's leaders
aren't as dumb as the general population.

In any case it will likely take one more nuke plant accident to kill
the entire industry. The companies involved can move to cleaning up
old plants...

You said the same thing repeatedly about the shuttle, now you're crying
because the program is ending! *

I have a feeling the Japanese population will feel differently after
they start to see the death toll caused by lack of air conditioning this
summer due to lack of nuclear power. *We should keep score here. *So
far, zero deaths from radiation. *How many deaths due to the heat so
far?

Jeff

well I never thought the shuttle would end with no future program
underway

Bull! Your prior posts on the topic essentially boiled down to "end the
shuttle program now".

As for japan once the cancer rates soar nuke power will be killed.

Doubtful they'll "soar" to that extent.

Remember the government and power company understated the radiation
lekage and failed to evacuate residents in a timely fashion. there are
still areas to be evacuated.

I expect the current leaders to be brought up on charges once
residents and espically kids start dying, or even getting cancer

Sure, keep on speculating in the same "chicken little" style you have
for years.

Jeff
--
" Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry
Spencer 1/28/2011

On Jul 13, 11:35*am, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article 4bf22831-f563-4cf9-8771-48c7db167266
@a10g2000vbz.googlegroups.com, says...







On Jul 12, 2:45*pm, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article d03f4df1-4cc9-42dc-80c9-3f66e2a260b2
@g12g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

Japanese were asked what should be done regarding the nation's nuclear
power plants, 2 percent said more nuclear plants should be built.
Twenty-five percent said they are in favor of the status-quo, while 42
percent said the number of plants should be reduced. Twenty-one
percent said all nuclear power plants should be eliminated.

Basing such important decisions on how the population "feels" about
where they get their power is awfully stupid. *Hopefully Japan's leaders
aren't as dumb as the general population.

In any case it will likely take one more nuke plant accident to kill
the entire industry. The companies involved can move to cleaning up
old plants...

You said the same thing repeatedly about the shuttle, now you're crying
because the program is ending! *

I have a feeling the Japanese population will feel differently after
they start to see the death toll caused by lack of air conditioning this
summer due to lack of nuclear power. *We should keep score here. *So
far, zero deaths from radiation. *How many deaths due to the heat so
far?

Jeff

well I never thought the shuttle would end with no future program
underway

Bull! *Your prior posts on the topic essentially boiled down to "end the
shuttle program now". *

As for japan once the cancer rates soar nuke power will be killed.

Doubtful they'll "soar" to that extent. *

Remember the government and power company understated the radiation
lekage and failed to evacuate residents in a timely fashion. there are
still areas to be evacuated.

I expect the current leaders to be brought up on charges once
residents and espically kids start dying, or even getting cancer

Sure, keep on speculating in the same "chicken little" style you have
for years.

Jeff
--
" Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry
Spencer 1/28/2011- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

some folks here deny how many chernobyl killed , and I was called
chicken little for asking about a shuttle stuck at station right
before the columbia loss...

then nasa decided it should plan for a shuttle stuck at station

In article 2aad70ea-64c1-476d-8ed3-fea2d95c57b6
@v7g2000vbk.googlegroups.com, says...

some folks here deny how many chernobyl killed , and I was called
chicken little for asking about a shuttle stuck at station right
before the columbia loss...

We're not denying it you ignorant git, we're saying that Chernobyl used
a reactor design (carbon moderator) that no one else, besides the
Russians, ever used. Even the Russians aren't dumb enough to build
another reactor of that design!

Because Chernobyl was fundamentally different than US, Japanese, and
European reactor designs, you simply cannot point to Chernobyl as an
example of what might happen elsewhere.

then nasa decided it should plan for a shuttle stuck at station

To cover their posterior in the very unlikely event that it should
happen. Few people thought it would ever be necessary, and history has
proven that it wasn't necessary.

Was it worth the extra cost and effort to keep ISS stocked for such a
contingency? I'll give you that much even though one could argue that
there were many other, more important, ways that NASA could have used
the up-mass necessary to bring up the extra food, water, O2, and etc.

It's just as important for every household to have a first aid it, a
working flashlight and battery powered radio, and a source for a few
days of fresh water and food. It's extremely unlikely such an emergency
kit would be needed by everyone, but for the few people who do end up
needing it on occasion (due to flood or other catastrophe), it turns out
that such a kit is very useful.

While it would be ideal for everyone to have a proper "emergency kit"
like I describe, most people don't. They'd be forced to improvise in an
emergency (similar to Apollo 13).

Jeff
--
" Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry
Spencer 1/28/2011