Climate Change

[xyz]

If you live on the coast, you should be sweating bullets: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/20/clima...ntl/index.html

Yup, run for the hills!!

Here is 110 years of sea level data in my area. The green line is the rate of change required to meet the 2050 climate predictions, from my local university. Trust the science!

[skaredshtles]

126.1° in Delhi today, highest ever recorded in India. Terrifying.

tHaT'S WeAtHeR NoT ClImAtE!!

[Trackhead]

Lithium in fracking water?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-58887-x

[fomofo]

There definitely are problems with renewables, and ultimately they will probably remain a second tier energy source, but will still be significant in their contribution. Ultimately nuclear fission/fusion seems like the obvious replacement for oil, and yet resistance remains high and will continue to do so.

Bill Gates agrees with you, and would like to tell you all about it.



Interesting piece, but I wish Margaret Brennan would of asked him a couple of additional questions...

1) What are you gonna do with the nuclear waste?

2) Would you build one of these in Medina?

[PB]

Nuclear waste disposal: space elevator with disposable cabins that can slingshot NW into sun.

<<spitball>>.

[Cocximus]

The nuclear waste we have is from outdated nuclear reactors. We have better technologies despite low R&D.

[fomofo]

I’m sure the technology is improving over time, but there is very little info on Gates’ reactor’s web site other than the new design “reduces the volume of waste produced”.

Details forthcoming, I guess.

Quick Google search finds this...

As with Generation II and III reactors, the non-reusable fission products, or waste, from Generation IV reactors will also have to be disposed of safely and stored permanently. The same applies to the waste that will result from the decommissioning of these reactors at the end of their lives.

https://www.polytechnique-insights.c...ation-reactor/

[californiagrown]

Nuclear waste disposal: space elevator with disposable cabins that can slingshot NW into sun.

<<spitball>>.

We arent creating a bunch of brand new highly radioactive material for reactors/bombs, we are simply taking a shitton of barely radioactive material and concentrating it down (enriching it). So, lets figure out an efficient way to dillute and disperse it back into the environment, mimicking its original state. The solution to pollution is dilution is accurate, done at appropriate scale. Heck, im pretty sure that the spent fuel and radioactive waste has less radioactivity than the fuel when it was new, so we dont even need to dilute it over the same volume of material that it was extracted from.

If we dump radioactive waste into a volcano, would the radioactive elements sink, or float? Id assume sink, as i think of them as heavy. So if we dump the waste in, the radioactive elements would just sink down away from the surface lava and back into the earths core. Lets just dump waste into a nice stable volcano that has a super low chance of violently erupting.


Yer welcome. Problems all solved.

[k2skier112]

^that sounds like some coreshit conspiracy theories

[californiagrown]

^that sounds like some coreshit conspiracy theories

Maybe chemtrails are just the governments nuclear waste dilution program. It was never about mind control. Alright, im done.


We do need to start throwing more money into Nuclear fusion technology. Its has been accomplished a few times now (on really small scales) and that is something that could legit solve all energy problems because of the vast amount of energy created from such tiny particles. It could have huge implications for not only here on earth with super computing, "clean" energy, etc, but also for powering space travel. I would really like to see that one crazy billionaire throw his considerable resources behind a worldwide push to advance this technology, instead of spending 50billion to be the king internet troll.

[k2skier112]

Fusion will be a hudge breakthrough

[skaredshtles]

Fusion will be a hudge breakthrough

IMO, fusion along with a battery breakthrough will be the killer-pair.

Though, as humans, we're likely to still fuck things up even if energy problems are "solved."

[Cocximus]

Sure, I don't see a problem managing our nuclear waste through dilution. We're doing it with our carbon.

[californiagrown]

Sure, I don't see a problem managing our nuclear waste through dilution. We're doing it with our carbon.

Not diluted enough. Need to spread that carbon back into the earth where it was previously stored instead of injecting it into the air.

The solution, to pollution, is dilution. If you still have pollution, you aint got enough dilution. We just haven't figured out dilution at an appropriate scale yet. And also, shooting "pollution", whether is nuclear waste, etc, into the sun or deep space might be a bad idea as it would remove elements and compounds from the earth's relatively stable geochemical systems/cycles with no way to ever get them back short of asteroid mining i guess. So we should really either go all in on the high impact-high replacement strategy, or go all in on the low impact-low replacement strategy. Low impact seems like less work and less risky.

[PB]

Sure, I don't see a problem managing our nuclear waste through dilution. We're doing it with our carbon.

Plastics, too! We're hiding them in penises!

[Core Shot]

^that sounds like some coreshit conspiracy theories

Do you know how many barrels of waste are off shore of California?

[fomofo]

Nobody does, but it’s a lot.

https://clui.org/ludb/site/farallon-...ear-waste-dump

[neufox47]

I’m all for nuclear if we can reduce the cost per Bill Gates plan to produce 100+ of the same reactor. The Vogtle plant cost so much though that we could produce 15x as much capacity with solar for the same $ and on a cloudy day where panels only produce 10% that electricity is still cheaper than nuclear.

Solar is getting so cheap we can over install it. Excess energy could be paired with direct carbon capture and use the energy to extract co2 from the atmosphere.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[skaredshtles]

<snip> Excess energy could be paired with direct carbon capture and use the energy to extract co2 from the atmosphere.

Nah, man. Bitcoin.

[californiagrown]

I’m all for nuclear if we can reduce the cost per Bill Gates plan to produce 100+ of the same reactor. The Vogtle plant cost so much though that we could produce 15x as much capacity with solar for the same $ and on a cloudy day where panels only produce 10% that electricity is still cheaper than nuclear.

Solar is getting so cheap we can over install it. Excess energy could be paired with direct carbon capture and use the energy to extract co2 from the atmosphere.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I had a drunk conversation with an engineer from a defense contractor (much smarter than me) at a holiday function neither of us wanted to attend, and he was REALLY high on all the new reactor technologies that were being developed. Apparently there are a bunch of smaller reactors (i.e. bill gates') and also sodium(?) reactors and stuff that produce very, very little waste and/or are able to reuse spent fissile material for fuel super easily. And also something about the new reactors basically not even having the ability to melt down because of basic physics, so Chernobyl and Fukishima couldnt happen. I knew about all the issues trying to store nuclear waste (more related to my area of expertise) and had been really down on it, but after that conversation (details are somewhat hazy), i came away really high on nuclear energy for future use. I think it is going to be one of those things where we look back 100 years from now and realize just how fucking dirty/wasteful/awful the early technology was, and regret being scared away and not pushing the technology forward faster.


The other thing to think about with solar is that it isnt space efficient (so large fields are eye sores and/or you are giving up wildlife habitat/farmable fields/ etc), and correct me if i am wrong but you do get a significant heat island effect from the panels. That said i am in favor of completely covering most of Arizona, Southern Nevada, and SE California with solar panels. Fuck that godforsaken desert.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

God forsaken desert? The Sonoran and Mojave Deserts are beautiful and incredibly diverse ecosystems. Large portions are already have Federal protections.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Buster Highmen]

One thing I read recently is that because the efficiency of solar panels decreases with heat, most solar panels are incorrectly installed so as to be perpendicular to the solar rays which makes them hotter than if they were oblique.

Installing the panels so that at the suns relative zenith, the plane of the panel is oblique to the solar ray, the panel is cooler and generates more electricity.

I'd always thought the worst landscapes are the suburbs where every construct should have a solar panel on it and damn the aesthetics.

[Bunion 2020]

The mighty Columbia River has helped power the American West with hydroelectricity since the days of FDR’s New Deal. But the artificial intelligence revolution will demand more. Much more.

So near the river’s banks in Central Washington, Microsoft is betting on an effort to generate power from atomic fusion — the collision of atoms that powers the sun — a breakthrough that has eluded scientists for the past century. Physicists predict it will elude Microsoft, too.

The tech giant and its partners say they expect to harness fusion by 2028, an audacious claim that bolsters their promises to transition to green energy but distracts from current reality. In fact, the voracious electricity consumption of artificial intelligence is driving an expansion of fossil fuel use — including delaying the retirement of some coal-fired plants.

In the face of this dilemma, Big Tech is going all in on experimental clean-energy projects that have long odds of success anytime soon. In addition to fusion, they are hoping to generate power through such futuristic schemes as small nuclear reactors hooked to individual computing centers and machinery that taps geothermal energy by boring 10,000 feet into the Earth’s crust.

Tech companies had promised “clean energy would be this magical, infinite resource,” said Tamara Kneese, a project director at the nonprofit Data & Society, which tracks the effect of AI and accuses the tech industry of using “fuzzy math” in its climate claims.

“Coal plants are being reinvigorated because of the AI boom,” Kneese said. “This should be alarming to anyone who cares about the environment.”

https://wapo.st/3KSgQxx

[Mofro261]

I had a drunk conversation with an engineer from a defense contractor (much smarter than me) at a holiday function neither of us wanted to attend, and he was REALLY high on all the new reactor technologies that were being developed. Apparently there are a bunch of smaller reactors (i.e. bill gates') and also sodium(?) reactors and stuff that produce very, very little waste and/or are able to reuse spent fissile material for fuel super easily. And also something about the new reactors basically not even having the ability to melt down because of basic physics, so Chernobyl and Fukishima couldnt happen. I knew about all the issues trying to store nuclear waste (more related to my area of expertise) and had been really down on it, but after that conversation (details are somewhat hazy), i came away really high on nuclear energy for future use. I think it is going to be one of those things where we look back 100 years from now and realize just how fucking dirty/wasteful/awful the early technology was, and regret being scared away and not pushing the technology forward faster.


The other thing to think about with solar is that it isnt space efficient (so large fields are eye sores and/or you are giving up wildlife habitat/farmable fields/ etc), and correct me if i am wrong but you do get a significant heat island effect from the panels. That said i am in favor of completely covering most of Arizona, Southern Nevada, and SE California with solar panels. Fuck that godforsaken desert.

Molten NACl instead of H20 both carrying the nukes and absorbing heat. Couple short vids on the tech below.

[fomofo]

Molten NACl instead of H20 both carrying the nukes and absorbing heat. Couple short vids on the tech below.

First video would not play for me, but second vid did, and it was interesting and informative. Thx for posting.

As a lay person coming up to speed on the basic concepts of the newer nuclear alternatives I try to absorb info, but take it with a grain of salt, (molten, not stirred), as even different scientifuc experts can have their beliefs influenced by their own biases, and perhaps financial ties of one form or another.

In that spirit, here's another take...



He does not strike me as a shill for Big Oil or anyone else, maybe more so the Noam Chomsky of the nuclear world? (Just a knee-jerk take.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._V._Ramana

https://thebulletin.org/biography/m-v-ramana

Clearly there is a huge and ever-growing need (and opportunity) to supply the electricity required by e-cars, computers, etc, and that's not lost on lots of smart, ambitious folks who would like to capitalism on that, perhaps even make a cleaner, better world for the people who will live in it long after we're all gone.

I say let em all at it, just keep asking the tough questions. And if you ever hear something like "this design is accident-proof" ... remember The Titanic.