There is no gas shortage

[shmokes]

Dude, you really gotta get off my back lately.

Um . . . sorry.  That's just me.  I don't even know what you're talking about.  The only other thread I can even think of that I'm talking to you in is the one in which you jumped on me about Grim Fandango.  If that's the only thread we're talking in, then I REALLY don't know what you're talking about.

[shmokes]

Environmentalists will never let that happen.

LMAO.  You, sir, have never been to the Nevada desert.   

Anyway, environmentalists are fully aware that the world is faced with choices, and going without power isn't one of them.  Choosing between a solar farm in the Nevada desert, and a coal plant anywhere, or a dam anywhere, or a nuclear plant anywhere, is an easy choice to make. 

[patrickl]

If not simply on the buildings, then there must be some space available in the Sahara. Now wouldn't that be cool if we all got dependent on the electric power coming from the Sahara.

[shmokes]

The Sahara would be no good.  Every time there was a wind storm the solar panels would be buried under feet of sand.   

[patrickl]

Hmm could be.

I wish they would find a way to make electricity from rain. The Netherlands would start making some serious money then 

I looked into getting solar panels for my new house. There is a new subsidising action going on in the Netherlands, but even after subsidies it's still economically disappointing. A standard installation would be about 3000 euro giving a 100 euro savings per year. There would be a 600 euro subsidy so it would take 24 years to break even (if prices don't rise). With a solar heater it was even worse (50 euro savings per year on a 2000 to 3000 investment). Other problem is that my biggest roof surface is facing north so it wouldn't work anyway. Still, I wasn't really impressed with the economical savings of current commercial solutions.

[shmokes]

I wish they would find a way to make electricity from rain. The Netherlands would start making some serious money then 

Wish granted . . . sort of   

[danny_galaga]

solar hot water is very popular here (actually i think it was invented here, but i could be wrong). in darwin, where im from, our house had a very early hot water system. when we bought the place, the electrical booster was dead. no matter. theres so much sun in darwin that we never bothered fixing it! the only time its really cloudy there (wet season) is also the hottest time of the year so luke warm water for a shower was more than enough   

my sister wants to get solar electricity for our house, but id rather wait until she buys my half of the house (which has just been evaluated at $520,000. woot!) and then she can do what she wants 

[ChadTower]

How much geothermal power gets harnessed in Australia?  I seem to remember reading it's a good place for that too.

[ChadTower]

Just came across this:  electricity via rice plants.  That would sure be useful in China.

[paigeoliver]

Nuclear power is the safest, cheapest power source we have that makes real actual power.

Not to mention the fact that they already built the facility to hold about 1000 years worth of the nuclear waste.

Environmentalists will never let that happen.

LMAO.  You, sir, have never been to the Nevada desert.   

Anyway, environmentalists are fully aware that the world is faced with choices, and going without power isn't one of them.  Choosing between a solar farm in the Nevada desert, and a coal plant anywhere, or a dam anywhere, or a nuclear plant anywhere, is an easy choice to make. 

[shmokes]

A facility that they're currently unable to use, if I'm not mistaken.

[paigeoliver]

Yes, due to alarmist environmentalists pushing legislation that actually hurts more than it helps.

See also the endangered species act and recycling (yup, recycling is harmful to the environment).

When push comes to shove and we run out of options then there will be reactors going up all over the place. We could build enough reactors to supply the entire energy need of America (including transport). Only reason it isn't happening now is that people have been lied to about the so-called dangers of nuclear power (which is safer, cleaner and cleaner than coal, oil, natural gas, and basically everything else that isn't wind).

A facility that they're currently unable to use, if I'm not mistaken.

[danny_galaga]

How much geothermal power gets harnessed in Australia?  I seem to remember reading it's a good place for that too.

iceland. thats where its at. we have sun...

[ChadTower]

You should try two things:  dingos and cane toads.  Put dingos on treadmills and maybe burn the toads for fuel.

[Ed_McCarron]

You should try two things:  dingos and cane toads.  Put dingos on treadmills and maybe burn the toads for fuel.

Nah, just lick the toads and noone will care that they have no power.

[ChadTower]

Who wants to lick a toad bigger than your head?  The high can't be that good.

And how big are those toads once you're high?   

[RayB]

BBTW why is this in EE and not in PnR?

To answer your question, I don't appear to have access to PnR. In fact, it doesn't even appear in the list of forums.

[Ed_McCarron]

To answer your question, I don't appear to have access to PnR. In fact, it doesn't even appear in the list of forums.

Lucky you.

[saint]

BBTW why is this in EE and not in PnR?

To answer your question, I don't appear to have access to PnR. In fact, it doesn't even appear in the list of forums.

Want full access to the Politics and Religion Forum?

[Ed_McCarron]

BBTW why is this in EE and not in PnR?

To answer your question, I don't appear to have access to PnR. In fact, it doesn't even appear in the list of forums.

Want full access to the Politics and Religion Forum?

Run Away!

[Level42]

Yes, due to alarmist environmentalists pushing legislation that actually hurts more than it helps.

See also the endangered species act and recycling (yup, recycling is harmful to the environment).

When push comes to shove and we run out of options then there will be reactors going up all over the place. We could build enough reactors to supply the entire energy need of America (including transport). Only reason it isn't happening now is that people have been lied to about the so-called dangers of nuclear power (which is safer, cleaner and cleaner than coal, oil, natural gas, and basically everything else that isn't wind).

A facility that they're currently unable to use, if I'm not mistaken.

Safer ? Tell that to the people in Chernobyl !

The only safe nuclear power is fusion. And we were told 20 years ago that they would have it "fixed" in about 20 years......
Well, I don't see it ever happening.

But I think you're right, the only and last real option will be nuclear power in the end.

[ChadTower]

Safer ? Tell that to the people in Chernobyl !

If they listen.

[Level42]

Where's my LCD top-gun.....gotta shoot those ---daisies--- !

Great pic just before bed-time


O, and I forgot to mention that Uranium is running out as well.......

Let's face it. We're doomed one way or the other. Better enjoy ourselves as long as it lasts......now, let me fire up that 110 W Centipede....

[shmokes]

Yes, due to alarmist environmentalists pushing legislation that actually hurts more than it helps.

See also the endangered species act and recycling (yup, recycling is harmful to the environment).

When push comes to shove and we run out of options then there will be reactors going up all over the place. We could build enough reactors to supply the entire energy need of America (including transport). Only reason it isn't happening now is that people have been lied to about the so-called dangers of nuclear power (which is safer, cleaner and cleaner than coal, oil, natural gas, and basically everything else that isn't wind).

A facility that they're currently unable to use, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Ed_McCarron]

O, and I forgot to mention that Uranium is running out as well.......

So is helium.  Wait'll theres no party balloons and watch the panic.

[patrickl]

O, and I forgot to mention that Uranium is running out as well.......

Actually, a few years ago they figured out that there is enough Uranium for hundreds if not thousands of years.

But indeed where is the fusion they were so close on getting to work? Things are awfully quiet on that front.

[Ed_McCarron]

But indeed where is the fusion they were so close on getting to work? Things are awfully quiet on that front.

Works in micro scale.  Doesn't scale up so well.

Give it time.

[danny_galaga]

But indeed where is the fusion they were so close on getting to work? Things are awfully quiet on that front.

Works in micro scale.  Doesn't scale up so well.

Give it time.

waddaya talkin 'bout? works perfectly when scaled up 

[Level42]

That's not fusion.

[paigeoliver]

Yes, Chernobyl was rather sucktastic. Also note that was an early type reactor mismanaged and misdesigned in Russia. America doesn't build or use those type of plants, and Russia has revamped that style.

Even including Chernobyl and only including the time period that includes all the nuclear incidents (1970-1992), nuclear power is 10 times safer than natural gas, 42 times safer than coal, and 110 times safer than hydroelectric power. If you only do 1993 to present than the safety record shoots through the roof into the thousands, as there haven't really been any nuclear deaths since then.

If 3 mile island happened once every 2 months and you lived there you would get the same radiation as everyone living in Denver just gets from the altitude.

Research it, there isn't a power source safer than nuclear power. Even wind power is much, much more dangerous (3504 deaths per terawatt year compared to 8 deaths per terawatt year for nuclear. (I guessed wrong earlier when I thought wind was safe). Even rooftop solar cells are more dangerous (these tend to kill people during installation).

Even if we had a chernobyl every single year it would still be safer than every other alternative.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16809

http://www.uic.com.au/nip14.htm

Yes, due to alarmist environmentalists pushing legislation that actually hurts more than it helps.

See also the endangered species act and recycling (yup, recycling is harmful to the environment).

When push comes to shove and we run out of options then there will be reactors going up all over the place. We could build enough reactors to supply the entire energy need of America (including transport). Only reason it isn't happening now is that people have been lied to about the so-called dangers of nuclear power (which is safer, cleaner and cleaner than coal, oil, natural gas, and basically everything else that isn't wind).

A facility that they're currently unable to use, if I'm not mistaken.

Safer ? Tell that to the people in Chernobyl !

The only safe nuclear power is fusion. And we were told 20 years ago that they would have it "fixed" in about 20 years......
Well, I don't see it ever happening.

But I think you're right, the only and last real option will be nuclear power in the end.

[patrickl]

That's not fusion.

Why not? You don't count the fusion in a hydrogen bomb as fusion?

BTW I also loved the hype over cold fusion a few decades ago. Would be cool if that really worked, but then if pigs could fly ...

[Level42]

Yeah, statistics are nice, tell that to the people who were in the area.......

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=kXD6Gtinvbc[/youtube]

[RayB]

You get your facts from rock concerts? wtf..

Do you know how many people died from the 3-mile island incident? 0
Did you know one of the reactors is still operating? People aren't turning green from working there.

People who fight what "might" happen with nuclear reactors are ignoring the fact that the alternative is spewing ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- into the atmosphere that we ALL breathe. How about we just learn from 3-mile, Chernobyl, and Monju, and build them safe with lots of redundancies. Then we can stop spewing pollution into the air we breathe.

[shmokes]

THAT is not a rock concert.  LMAO.  I have seen many rock concerts, and they aren't like that.  Performance art, maybe.  But a rock concert?  I don't think so.   

[Level42]

You get your facts from rock concerts? wtf..

Of course not, this was just an illustration (and a great song). Geez, loosen up guys...

Murphy's law. What can go wrong will go wrong.

And this is where I stop, for the same reason that I don't want access to the politics section

[Level42]

THAT is not a rock concert.  LMAO.  I have seen many rock concerts, and they aren't like that.  Performance art, maybe.  But a rock concert?  I don't think so.   

You obviously don't "get" Kraftwerk. I prefer this over any "rock" concert anytime. Tastes differ.

[shmokes]

I may or may not get Kraftwerk, but honestly, I think we can both agree that a Kraftwerk performance is not a rock concert any more than the NY Philharmonic Orchestra puts on a rock concert.

[knave]

That's not fusion.

Why not? You don't count the fusion in a hydrogen bomb as fusion?

BTW I also loved the hype over cold fusion a few decades ago. Would be cool if that really worked, but then if pigs could fly ...

The reaction in a nuclear bomb or power plant is fission...not fusion...to make sure I wasn't wrong

Fission:  A nuclear reaction in which an atomic nucleus splits into fragments, usually two fragments of comparable mass.

vs.

Fusion:  The process whereby the nuclei of lighter elements, especially the isotopes of hydrogen (deuterium and tritium ) combine to form the nucleus of a heavier element accompanied by the release of substantial amounts of energy.

Fusion is how the sun generates heat and light.

[Level42]

I may or may not get Kraftwerk, but honestly, I think we can both agree that a Kraftwerk performance is not a rock concert any more than the NY Philharmonic Orchestra puts on a rock concert.

Agreed. Did you ever see the part where they let the robots do the actual performance ?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSsa9RyVzT4[/youtube]

[patrickl]

That's not fusion.

Why not? You don't count the fusion in a hydrogen bomb as fusion?

BTW I also loved the hype over cold fusion a few decades ago. Would be cool if that really worked, but then if pigs could fly ...

The reaction in a nuclear bomb or power plant is fission...not fusion...to make sure I wasn't wrong

The picture is of the explosion of a hydrogen bomb. That's fusion. That's why a hydrogen bomb is som much more powerful than a fission bomb.