Post AmfLUahdrCXt7XOKGW by xyhhx@438punk.house
(DIR) More posts by xyhhx@438punk.house
(DIR) Post #AmfLUahdrCXt7XOKGW by xyhhx@438punk.house
2024-10-04T13:31:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
i'm on the fence about nuclear power.on the one hand, it is a clean (relatively speaking) source of power, and all historical catastrophes were results of bureaucratic incompetence rather than technical limitationson the other hand, nuclear technology goes hand-in-hand with nuclear weapons; bureaucratic incompetence is all but inevitable; and renewables existi'm looking to harvest opinions and discussion to help figure out where i stand... please boost and leave your thoughts!#boost #nuclear #power #sustainability #climateChange
(DIR) Post #AmfLUbLLTaIx6fy29Q by lopta@mastodon.social
2024-10-04T14:35:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx I'm very much in favour of renewables but I think we'll need fission to meet baseload until an alternative can be made practical.
(DIR) Post #AmfLUbsJV0fykvOMXQ by xyhhx@438punk.house
2024-10-04T13:33:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
yes this post was provoked by discussion about microsoft wanting a wholeass nuclear plant for themselves; but it's not specifically about that either
(DIR) Post #AmfLUc2wrTBPHuMr7A by feld@friedcheese.us
2024-10-04T14:38:42.623378Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@lopta @xyhhx And the world will never de-nuclearize. That genie cannot be put back into the bottle.
(DIR) Post #AmfORN2iUKgBkSPAOG by nicholas@aklp.club
2024-10-04T15:20:38.087611Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Nuclear power only goes hand-in-hand with nuclear weapons because it was designed that way. Oakridge had 2 successful thorium salt reactors running for years in the early development of the nuclear power program, but canceled the whole line of research when it was determined that they couldn't generate plutonium from the decay chain.The uranium reactors that were the basis for all nuclear power we generate today are dangerous, expensive, and inefficient compared to other chemistries, but they could provide a redundant supply chain of weapons grade material, and that outweighed other considerations as the cold-war got underway.Just like the space race wasn't about exploration and reaching for the stars, or even bankrupting the soviets; it was always just a PR-friendly cover for developing the heavy-lift and avionics capabilities needed to produce ICBMs.
(DIR) Post #An6Ze76FmXiRU9G2We by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:03:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx So, I'm known for taking a pretty strong stand on this question.https://anonradio.net/tag/a-step-farther-out/https://man-and-atom.info/index.htmlTo the question of nuclear weapons, creating and using them is a POLITICAL, not a technical matter. None of the countries that have done so used civil nuclear power plants to get there. Most built power plants only after building bombs, and Israel and North Korea don't have nuclear power yet. The true enemy is war and militarism, and focusing…(cont'd)
(DIR) Post #An6ZuBY10rjDufuH4q by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:06:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx …on nuclear disarmament is a dangerous distraction.More than that, in the past 100+ years, conflict over fossil fuels has been (and continues to be, see Essequibo for instance) a major cause of wars, while control of fossil fuels has been a decisive factor in the outcome of wars.Before fossil fuels were important, land was a major focus of conflict. And that means food, fodder, and firewood — the fuel sources of a pre-industrial society. Renewables likewise require…(cont'd)
(DIR) Post #An6aFW3bxCVlbUrArg by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:10:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx …vast tracts of land, as well as non-fuel mineral resources (steel, concrete, et cetera) in large quantities. Obviously, some areas are more favorable for wind or solar development than others, just as only certain places are suitable for hydro.Fission power plants, on the other hand, are very compact and can be sited almost anywhere, notably, near the load centers. Likewise their raw material requirements are modest. With the regenerative ("breeder") fuel cycle, uranium…(cont'd)
(DIR) Post #An6acxyEL69GprWPLM by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:14:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx …already mined would suffice to provide current and foreseeable world total energy (not just electricity) needs for generations, to say nothing of the stockpiled by-product thorium from rare-earth mining, or U and Th from coal ash, seawater, and other unconventional resources.Speaking of total energy, nuclear plants located reasonably close to cities can provide heat for domestic and industrial use, and this heat can even be used for refrigeration. This costs in pipe-work…(cont'd)
(DIR) Post #An6atwgaMuhzm4MgXA by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:17:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx …but saves considerably on heat pumps.In a conventional central-station power system, with fuel-burning power plants close to the load, it's common for transmission and distribution to account for 60% of the cost of supplying the kilowatt-hour to the consumer. Renewables require far more T&D, even before we consider storage schemes. This implies that, even if renewables were completely free at the source, they would supply power at a higher price to the consumer…(cont'd)
(DIR) Post #An6bHQqsNW4NzcNSiW by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:21:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx …than nuclear, which long ago proved to be cheaper than fossil-fuel power, at least in high-load-factor applications. Nuclear is often quoted as having a very high cost, but when you look at what you get for the money, the picture is quite different. This is especially important because most decarbonization schemes imply at least tripling electricity consumption in the wealthy countries, and much greater increases in the poorer ones.(to be concluded)
(DIR) Post #An6bS0DXkEOIZb1JU8 by collectifission@greennuclear.online
2024-10-17T18:23:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@publius @xyhhx Great take. No notes.And my instance has a 5000 character limit, hint hint 😉
(DIR) Post #An6bTsLhyBqakVjTJg by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:23:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@xyhhx Ultimately, if we want peace and justice, we need (as a global society) far more energy than we are using today. High-energy societies can afford to abolish slavery, to secure equal rights for minorities, to practice democracy… Low-energy societies tend to be extremely stratified, with small elites riding atop the work of vast illiterate masses.And the high-energy society is far easier to achieve with fission than with renewables.#AtomicPowerToThePeople
(DIR) Post #An6cVFYfGTkoyT0nUe by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
2024-10-17T18:35:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@collectifission @xyhhx I've been thinking about separating my "social" and "advocacy" profiles, so I'll bear that in mind.