Pro-Deathers always misinterpret masks. Masks reduce the amount of pathogen spread by the person with the pathogen. That always gets omitted when Pro-Deathers talk about masks.
Build Nuclear Now!
- Thread starter The-Hack
- Start date
Many things can be stated without proof. The hope is policy cannot be forced upon without it, but unfortunately that is rarely the case.
I think the argument is most centered around government policy being enacted with the reason being science. COVID just happens to be the most recent example, and unlike climate change one that could more easily be seen to be accurate or inaccurate due to being much shorter term, wouldn’t you agree? Unless you have a more recent and relevant example.
You’re confusing Capitol Cost with actual operating cost.
Nuclear is the cheapest, by a long shot in actual Megawatt production. It’s also reliable as is coal and Natural Gas.
Notice that the more we phase out fossil and start relying on wind and solar the more costly and less reliable our electrical grid becomes. That isn’t a coincidence.
Luckily, power producers have realized it, and the recent SCOTUS ruling has allowed them to ignore the EPA. In the months since the ruling new Natural Gas power plants announcements have jumped as well as pumped storage sites.
We've had public health policies that people have resisted since at least Shakespeare's time -- The Globe and other theaters were closed during plague eruptions, for example. But even before that, lepers were kept from the population at large. Since the discovery of pathogens, one might have hoped that the resistance would diminish as people could easily understand the methods of transmission.
But no. There's money to be made and power to be seized from stirring up and preying upon anxiety.
Good catch.
You have to look at levelized costs which is a projection. This page has a bar graph that represents the projected costs of various types of energy production methods. Wind still wins, followed by solar but nuclear fairs pretty well. Oddly coal which use to be the cheapest is now the most expensive:
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 – Analysis - IEA
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.
www.iea.org
The problem with nuclear for years has been the extremely long lead time between investing capital and getting any kind of return on it. From planning a reactor to turning it on, it isn't uncommon for 20 years to elapse. Do you want your billions sitting on a shelf? It's a bit like 20 year old bourbon. The distillery isn't making a dime while it ages in the barrel.Good catch.
You have to look at levelized costs which is a projection. This page has a bar graph that represents the projected costs of various types of energy production methods. Wind still wins, followed by solar but nuclear fairs pretty well. Oddly coal which use to be the cheapest is now the most expensive:
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 – Analysis - IEA
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.
Americans are hamstrung because since time out of mind it's the heinous sin of heresy to imagine that government can play a constructive roll in anything. But government partnering with industry would be a path forward to getting more reactors online.
But there are 2 other issues. Nuclear engineering course have become derelict. We'd have to recreate them. And if you could snap your fingers and have 40 new nuclear reactors today, where could you site them?
-"pro-deathers"...good lord, do better. This is not a phrase a serious person uses.
-back on topic: I'm an all of the above guy with regards to energy transmission. I like fossil, wind, solar, hydro *and* nuclear.
^reliable "renewables" aren't here yet...we're working on that. Needs to be a combo of sources. Forcing the issue (Sri Lanka for example) is economically* suicidal.
*without healthy economies, nothing else matters.
-back on topic: I'm an all of the above guy with regards to energy transmission. I like fossil, wind, solar, hydro *and* nuclear.
^reliable "renewables" aren't here yet...we're working on that. Needs to be a combo of sources. Forcing the issue (Sri Lanka for example) is economically* suicidal.
*without healthy economies, nothing else matters.
Actually, I wish people in the abortion debate had to refer to themselves as "Anti-Lifers" or "Anti-Choicers", merely for my own amusement.
Depends, the one on top has a foot print of a 100-150 acres. Wildlife flourishes around it.Which one would you want to live next to:
This?
or this?
The one on the bottom has essentially created a several thousand acre desert for wildlife.
Great, you’ll have the spectacular view of acres upon acres of solar panels. They’ll be no quail, rabbit, deer, elk or songbirds, it’ll be an environmentalists dream… meanwhile on reclaimed coal mines all the above flourish.
Start up costs for a nuclear plant is enormous. It’s probably one of the main reasons there aren’t more.Good catch.
You have to look at levelized costs which is a projection. This page has a bar graph that represents the projected costs of various types of energy production methods. Wind still wins, followed by solar but nuclear fairs pretty well. Oddly coal which use to be the cheapest is now the most expensive:
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 – Analysis - IEA
Projected Costs of Generating Electricity 2020 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.
Cost per mega watt after start up cost is dirt cheap though, cheaper than any other source and it’s reliable.
OK, but self-righteous-people-indifferent-to-the-lives-of-others isn't quite as snappy.
We all make choices. Mostly we don't choose between two similar things that we feel are near ideal but are between the dreadful things that are actually possible.
-the assumption that folks that questioned covid policy* are "self-righteous-people-indifferent-to-the-lives-of-others"...is telling, likely fueled by histrionic "disaster porn" media.
^sure...there were some "muh constitutional rights" dweebs out there...but that's not who many of us on this board are.
*upon further review...a lot of those folks were correct in their questioning. Thankfully it's documented in the covid thread pinned to the top of the board.
-more concerning is the whitewashing/re- framing that is happening by folks that don't want to be tied to the destruction of economies...and more importantly the *crushing* damage done to children* by shutting down schools. We won't know the cost for years to come. It's criminal.
*primarily poor and poc.
^sure...there were some "muh constitutional rights" dweebs out there...but that's not who many of us on this board are.
*upon further review...a lot of those folks were correct in their questioning. Thankfully it's documented in the covid thread pinned to the top of the board.
-more concerning is the whitewashing/re- framing that is happening by folks that don't want to be tied to the destruction of economies...and more importantly the *crushing* damage done to children* by shutting down schools. We won't know the cost for years to come. It's criminal.
*primarily poor and poc.
I hope you are right about the latter, and wrong about the former. As to the view, it will be visible from an airplane, or space, but is located 8 miles from my home, and will only be broadly viewable by one farm family from an elevated portion in a rear portion of their farm: Central Kentucky farmland has significant “roll.”
The plans look similar to a solar farm about 6 miles North of my location: a density of about 40-50 percent of the land area, with panels at a five foot height. This first solar farm completed in my area is actually visible from a public highway. The proposed solar farm encompassing one of my families’ properties (on more than 2000 acres, ten owners total) would only be broadly viewable if canoeing Dix River, or flying over it.
I desire to run no livestock (sheep) on the land if built. As to the notion of complete abandonment by birds, etc., we’ll see. I expect it could become a ground hog haven, but they might threaten the stability of the supports for the panels.
However it comes out, I’ll report!
Last edited:
That sounds swell, and you don’t have to take my word for it. KDFWR has used former strip mines to start the first wild elk herd east of the Rockies, with great results. They have also made Peabody one of the top quail research and hunting areas in the surrounding states.
A solar farm is an eye sore, that eliminates farm or natural environments. It’s a pipe dream, the carrot in front of the mule. It makes people feel good but doesn’t make anything better, that’s a solar farm.
As I understand it, you do not like solar farms!!
I’m pretty familiar with the Elk. In the 90’s, I prosecuted a Central Kentucky gent who shot and killed one who had managed to ramble 80 or 90 miles back west, into the Blue Grass Region. His westerly path was pretty damn near perfect for getting him back to where he’d been captured, way out West.
I was not familiar with the quail. That’s pretty cool, and is the only sporting bird I have ever successfully hunted. I’ve wasted boxes of shells on dove.
I think there are places for solar, I don’t see the environmental benefit in removing thousands of acres from its natural state or from farmibg to install a solar farm that will produce a minimal amount of electricity, that isn’t reliable.
I think many of the contracts are corruption to get Govt money.
First one looks like a Pink Floyd album.Which one would you want to live next to:
This?
or this?
One benefit to solar is that when the project ends, panels can be removed and the land is returned to farmland, there is no need to lay a bunch of concrete aor move tons of dirt and rock, for example like in surface mining
Solar is just one piece, not the full solution
This is the kind of idiocy I worry about when governments get in the business of trying to cut carbon emissions.
nypost.com
Mama Mia! NYC rules crack down on coal-, wood-fired pizzerias — must cut carbon emissions up to 75%
New York City is even targeting beloved pizza pie in a bid to curb carbon pollutants — drafting new rules that would require pizzerias that use coal and wood burning ovens for decades to curb…
nypost.com
I support CO2 reduction efforts but this seems like pissing in the ocean to be honest. And BTW the best pizza I have ever had came from Brick Oven PizzaThis is the kind of idiocy I worry about when governments get in the business of trying to cut carbon emissions.
Mama Mia! NYC rules crack down on coal-, wood-fired pizzerias — must cut carbon emissions up to 75%
New York City is even targeting beloved pizza pie in a bid to curb carbon pollutants — drafting new rules that would require pizzerias that use coal and wood burning ovens for decades to curb…
I wanted to add a point that you never hear discussed with respect to renewable energy and industrial load. Although I am not an engineer, I work in the electric industry doing cost studies and designing rates. I have worked with power production engineers over the years. The one thing I have been repeatedly told, that no one in the media talks about is renewable energy and industrial load. Some industrial load apparently cannot be served by a battery. In other words, the voltage requirements are so high that you need a spinning mass in order to "push" adequate amounts of power from the source to the load. I have been told several times that batteries will never be able to replace spinning mass generation sources for a variety of industrial load applications. I'm not saying this to disparage the effort to develop renewable energy, I'm just pointing out there are serious limitations to what renewables are capable of serving.
That's interesting but let's not forgot hydro, geothermal and wind generating systems do have turbines (spinning masses). I don't think that's a legit reason not to move more towards renewables. Maybe 100% renewable energy isn't feasible in the immediate future in the US but there are 7 countries already close to 100%:
A 100% renewable grid isn’t just feasible, it’s already happening
Debate over whether we can run electric grids on 100% renewables in coming decades misses a key point: many countries and regions are already there.
reneweconomy.com.au
There were people in 1910 that said the automobile will never replace the horse because building roads would be too expensive.
Keep in mind those articles are written by journalists who generally don't have a clue how all of this fits together. Perhaps areas with lots of consistent hydro could make it work, but generally if an "area" is 100% renewable, it only means the kWh being provided came off renewable resources. It doesn't mean that the voltage support necessary to run heavy industrial was provided from renewables. In an "area" perhaps you can piggy back your system voltage support from your neighbors and not have to provide that yourself. That's a major problem with how things are reported. People don't know the difference in energy (kWh) and capacity (kW or kVA). They certainly don't understand the significance of the two in what it costs to provide electric service. Of course, if an area doesn't have heavy industry, then perhaps they can also make it work. Again, I'm not saying this to disparage renewable energy. I'm saying it interject some reality into a discussion that journalists seldom bring to what they write. My hope is that one day all power production clean. I'm certainly right leaning politically, but I think we do need less pollution of all types, more habitat preservation, etc. I just don't want false narratives being perpetuated and in many cases they are.That's interesting but let's not forgot hydro, geothermal and wind generating systems do have turbines (spinning masses). I don't think that's a legit reason not to move more towards renewables. Maybe 100% renewable energy isn't feasible in the immediate future in the US but there are 7 countries already close to 100%:
A 100% renewable grid isn’t just feasible, it’s already happening
Debate over whether we can run electric grids on 100% renewables in coming decades misses a key point: many countries and regions are already there.
There were people in 1910 that said the automobile will never replace the horse because building roads would be too expensive.
Appreciate your thoughts and the rational tone which is sorely lacking on this board when discussing the topic
I'd be fine with Anti-Legal Abortion and Pro-Legal Abortion if we want to be fair.
It’s all good now, the earth has been saved and the polar ice caps are already expanding, cooler summers, colder winters. The balance has been reset 🎉
Can you imagine what must be going through his mind as he greets this useless individual while his country is at war?
JJ my bet is Greta wants to know the Ukrainian plan about when the Russian bombs blast the buildings, how many gas stoves are leaking into the atmosphere and we are looking at another ozone disaster the likes which have never been seen by scientists 💨
Latest posts
-
-
Ol' Pocket Lint thinks he's something at Memphis- Latest: RunninRichie
-
-
