|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
hanson wrote:
"Sir Frederick" wrote: A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste has been to dump it into the sun. hanson wrote: ... but wouldn't the solar radiation bake, vaporize and ionize such incoming loads... and wouldn't the solar wind blow that gossamer stuff then right back into the direction it came from? ... ahahahaha... ahahahanson Worse yet, it could contaminate the sun with radiation. You irresponsible fool! -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
On Aug 13, 9:37*pm, Howard Brazee wrote:
On 14 Aug 2009 00:18:49 GMT, Michael Coburn wrote: BY the time you get a large scale uranium nuclear plant built the thorium reactors will obsolete it. Power plant technologies seem to advance slowly. * But "obsolete" power plants are producing power all over the world. Well, that's why they're obsolete. Since the only people who even build power plants anymore, are governments. The people with actual engineering have working on AI, Electronic Books, Self-Replicating Machines, Self-Assembling Robots, DSP, Fiber Optics, Holograms, UAVs, AAVs, Drones, Cruise Missiles, Phalanx, Satellites, GPS, Desktop Publishing, HDTV, On-Line Banking, On-Line Shopping, On-Line Publishing, Optical Computers, Atomic Clock Wris****ches, Light Sticks, Cyber Batteries, and Distributed Processing Software. Since what power plants everywhere have in common, irrrespective of their current age, is Press idiots and Paint Brushes -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
: Sir Frederick
: A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive : waste has been to dump it into the sun. Really? In which classical SF works is this method used? ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
Wayne Throop wrote:
Sir Frederick wrote A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste has been to dump it into the sun. Really? In which classical SF works is this method used? ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) No it isnt. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
Michael Coburn wrote
Howard Brazee wrote Michael Coburn wrote BY the time you get a large scale uranium nuclear plant built the thorium reactors will obsolete it. Power plant technologies seem to advance slowly. But "obsolete" power plants are producing power all over the world. But are they creating decent ROI? Yep. The costs are now sunk costs. The investment in a large nuclear facility will not produce a profit Tell that to the french and japanese. Dont be TOO surprised when they just laugh in your face. whereas it may well be that an investment in a thorium plant will do so with a greater certainty. That is obviously not the case at present for thorium. But it would not take much public funding to make it the case. Easy to claim. Have fun actually substantiating that claim. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
:: ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid
:: method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) : "Rod Speed" : No it isnt. You'd spend 30 kps delta-v just to drop something on the sun that would be perfectly safe to dispose of with less than 10kps delta-v? Or, for that matter, none? Pfft. Sure. Go ahead. It's your money to throw down a rat-hole. Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" wrote:
hanson wrote: "Sir Frederick" wrote: "Sir Frederick" A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste [1] has been to dump it into the sun. hanson wrote: .... but wouldn't the solar radiation bake, vaporize and ionize such incoming loads [1]... and wouldn't the solar wind blow that gossamer stuff then right back into the direction it came from? ... ahahahaha... ahahahanson "Sir Frederick" wrote: I have no idea.... ahahahaha... ahahamartin Dirk wrote: Worse yet, it could contaminate the sun with radiation. You irresponsible fool! hanson wrote: Martin, [1] becomes a plasma long, long before it hits the sun's corona or any of the sun's atmospheric layers So, now you know.... ahahahaha... And don't plagiarize... In your case the analog is: fafafafa... fafafafartin Martin. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
In article , Rod Speed wrote: Wayne Throop wrote: Sir Frederick wrote A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste has been to dump it into the sun. Really? In which classical SF works is this method used? ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) No it isnt. Right now, what Americans call "spent nuclear fuel" could be sold to countries that aren't afraid to use plutonium as "plutonium ore". Or we could extract the plutonium (and U235) from spent fuel ourselves, but that would require that we quit being evil and stupid. -- Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice." Autoreply is disabled | |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
Paul Ciszek wrote
Rod Speed wrote Wayne Throop wrote Sir Frederick wrote A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste has been to dump it into the sun. Really? In which classical SF works is this method used? ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) No it isnt. Right now, what Americans call "spent nuclear fuel" could be sold to countries that aren't afraid to use plutonium as "plutonium ore". It makes more sense for them to use new uranium etc. Or we could extract the plutonium (and U235) from spent fuel ourselves, It makes more sense to design the fission system so that the fuel never becomes 'spent' with breeders etc. but that would require that we quit being evil and stupid. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Whats Wrong With NUCLEAR Power
Wayne Throop wrote:
Rod Speed wrote Wayne Throop wrote: Sir Frederick wrote A classical science fiction method of getting rid of radioactive waste has been to dump it into the sun. ( Of course, in real life, it's an extraordinarily silly and stupid method, even if the space infrastructure existed to do it. ) No it isnt. You'd spend 30 kps delta-v just to drop something on the sun that would be perfectly safe to dispose of with less than 10kps delta-v? It does get rid of any argument the anti nuke fools would have about disposing of the used fuel rods. Or, for that matter, none? Pfft. Sure. Go ahead. It's your money to throw down a rat-hole. Peanuts in the total cost of the nuke. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why nuclear power is better = solar power stinks | Rich[_1_] | Amateur Astronomy | 29 | November 18th 08 04:55 AM |
OT Russian floating nuclear power plant. | Pat Flannery | Policy | 2 | September 28th 07 08:45 AM |
So... is someone Sabotaging our Nuclear Power Plants? | jonathan | Policy | 0 | April 21st 06 01:41 AM |
CNN article about nuclear power on space probes | quibbler | Policy | 9 | February 28th 04 08:00 PM |
Nuclear power in space | Brian Gaff | Space Shuttle | 5 | August 2nd 03 01:58 AM |