OT: Glad to see this shift in thinking concerning Power
- Thread starter PirateDawg
- Start date
I wouldn’t make that bet if I were you.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/com...three-its-last-six-nuclear-plants-2022-01-01/
Utter stupidity. I'm all for renewable energy when it makes sense. And I'm all for hybrid vehicles when they make sense, and total electrics in some situations. But if we're going to move to a clean electric era, nuclear is going to have to be a big part of it.
Go bat **** crazy if you will
Oh Oh a problem in dealing with old solar pannels... screw that
What the hell are they going to do with the old dead batteries,
brought on by forced movement to solar power?
Oh Oh a problem in dealing with old solar pannels... screw that
What the hell are they going to do with the old dead batteries,
brought on by forced movement to solar power?
Dumb move by Germany to shutter nuclear power plants. Putin is pleased, though. The sooner we embrace nuclear power the better. I'm all for energy efficiency but I know a greenies who don't like nuclear, primarily because they're idiots and it doesn't sound morally right to them (they're big on appearing morally pure to others). I drive a pretty-cool hybrid and I have a super-energy efficient home. Had solar panels once that worked well for several years on an old house, saved me a lot of money for a while (great rebate and tax incentives and cut bill in summer by about 40%) and then efficiency declined and I ended up with roof damage that cost way too much to repair. Won't do solar again or at least not for a while. Don't recommend solar panels on a roof and only recommend for yards if you can do your own repairs.
I want to agree with you but German scientific knowhow is top notch. If they think they can do it, let’s see what happens.
If successful, don’t be surprised to see oil & gas go in the same direction as soon as Germany wants.
If successful, don’t be surprised to see oil & gas go in the same direction as soon as Germany wants.
The strange thing to me is it took him 20 or 30 years to prove to himself he was wrong all along, with all the others that have put us on this deadend path. However, he still holds on to the belief that caused us to make this huge mistake. All of the predictions from folks like him and the models of 30 years ago have also been proven wrong. The ocean's should be much higher and the global temperature much higher if they were right back then. How many times must you be wrong before you question yourself? I am glad he has actually looked at reality and not the fantasy that our leaders keep selling us.
I've often said that rather than get 20% of our power from nuclear, Mississippi should build 4 more nuclear plants and go to a full 100%. Anything to shed our image and become "the nuclear state," and would bring a renaissance of smart, well-educated people moving into our state and kick-starting our economy.
I believe Germany is going to use biomass power plants which is not much better than a coal power plant. Shuttering nuclear for that is plain silly.
Last edited:
Nuclear Power Plants north & south of Warren County?
Let’s not have ANOTHER Siege of Vicksburg.**
Let’s not have ANOTHER Siege of Vicksburg.**
electric vehicles are in no way immune to environmental costs. Lithium mining is incredibly environmentally destructive. In a lot of the time, the environmental cost of mining, shipping, construction, and further shipping of electric cars negate the benefits of them altogether.
I'm hoping for the success of the biomass refinery in Natchez. That is something with which I could truly see Mississippi succeeding.
I disagree completely. German marketing is top notch, but German science and engineering is not. When I hear German engineering I think of something overly complex that breaks a lot.
South Carolina is #2 at 56%, behind New Hampshire at 61%.
At least according to this:
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=43256
From 2010, so I'll believe it when I see it: https://www.natchezdemocrat.com/2010/01/21/rentech-construction-to-start-next-year/
They're not immune, but overall they're much cleaner and better for the environment than gas or diesel cars. The environmental payback for an electric vehicle is about 13,000 miles in the USA, but can be as high as 78,000 miles in a country like China where most electricity is dirty coal.
It's a political decision, not a scientific one. Maybe the added burden will incentivize their scientists to figure out a way to do things better, but that didn't really happen with their initial push to solar.
I hope this technology is better than the coal gassification plant in Kemper Co. That wound up being a huge cluster 17.
We can indeed. Unfortunately, the grower doesn't get jack after spending 20 - 30 years raising them or you run the risk of mother nature coming along and 17ing your crop up. We had 100 acres of pine timber in Attala Co. that had just been thinned out a few years before a tornado roared through and took out about 30 acres of it. Any form of agriculture is a gamble, just ask a farmer.
Rube Goldberg was American. **
Seriously though, German science is top notch. You had the US conducting Operation Paperclip (and the Russians did their version as well).
And here's a list of German Nobel Prize winners many of which were honored for scientific achievements (about 20 or so in the past 30 years): Here.
Seriously though, German science is top notch. You had the US conducting Operation Paperclip (and the Russians did their version as well).
And here's a list of German Nobel Prize winners many of which were honored for scientific achievements (about 20 or so in the past 30 years): Here.
Didn't realize Grand Gulf was the biggest in the US, that's cool. And now I see you're more talking about getting to 100%, I guess I was just thinking about the number of reactors.
Are fuel cells not a thing any longer?
Or has it just been proven getting hydrogen out of water could never by economical/scalable? I had read at a point in time there was some success using only solar energy - but that stuff is over my head. Seems like if you crack that code, then jackpot. Practically endless supply of very clean energy. Less politics involved with sea water. You can get away from battery car nonsense (that's a neat product/fad that's not long-term sustainable with current tech) and all the rare metals issues/China that come along with it as well.
But yeah, use nuclear as a stop gap to low risk/truly clean and use batteries until it doesn't make sense any longer. Hydrocarbons just muddy the geopolitical game too much, among other undesirable things.
ETA: I guess fuel cells can be considered batteries? Don't nail me on the semantics - you know what the point is.
Or has it just been proven getting hydrogen out of water could never by economical/scalable? I had read at a point in time there was some success using only solar energy - but that stuff is over my head. Seems like if you crack that code, then jackpot. Practically endless supply of very clean energy. Less politics involved with sea water. You can get away from battery car nonsense (that's a neat product/fad that's not long-term sustainable with current tech) and all the rare metals issues/China that come along with it as well.
But yeah, use nuclear as a stop gap to low risk/truly clean and use batteries until it doesn't make sense any longer. Hydrocarbons just muddy the geopolitical game too much, among other undesirable things.
ETA: I guess fuel cells can be considered batteries? Don't nail me on the semantics - you know what the point is.
Last edited:
Wasnt version 1.0 of this already built and subsequently demolished in Columbus?
Maybe being 'wrong' is due to the reality that just like technology(your phone now is slightly better than your phone 30 years ago), predictive models have improved in the last few decades.
I hear weather forecasts have improved just a smidge in that time too, but nobody is complaining there.
Source?
I am not asking because I disagree, I am asking because I have looked into this many times and havent come across info that seems legitimate at the time I am reading it.
That list has some flaws. For example it is counting Henry Kissinger as a German. But even if you take that list as accurate, they are still behind the US and UK.
Ok, ask yourself. If you had to drive across a desert in a 10 year old Mercedes or a ten year old Toyota, which would you chose?
Ok, ask yourself. If you had to drive across a desert in a 10 year old Mercedes or a ten year old Toyota, which would you chose?
I have an uncle who has, somehow, on two separate occasions won a new Mercedes in a raffle. He still cusses both of those cars to this day.
You do not want to go full nuclear.
With a nuclear plant you want to set it at 95%-98% capacity and just let it run. So that is your baseline generation. But nuclear plants don't do well ramping up or down quickly. So you want to have something else, gas, hydroelectric, something that does go up and down to meet the demand on the grid.
With a nuclear plant you want to set it at 95%-98% capacity and just let it run. So that is your baseline generation. But nuclear plants don't do well ramping up or down quickly. So you want to have something else, gas, hydroelectric, something that does go up and down to meet the demand on the grid.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.