Daily reminder that if you favor any kind of energy over nuclear, you are an uneducated faggot.
Daily reminder that if you actively argue against investing in nuclear energy, you are an even bigger cock gobbler and you should kill yourself before your cancerous views infect other voters.
bump, would like to see world explode.
So when the fusion reactor in France goes online and proves just how obsolete and dangerous nuclear power is, we should ignore it?
>>685035001
>Misconception #1
Unless you used the money to buy a bunch of (now obsolete) light water reactors, there is no way anything like this could happen
I energy myself thanks
>>685035188
The nuclear fusion reactor? Yeah, that'll show the world how obsolete and dangerous nuclear power is.
>>685035188
I wish had your gift of clairvoyance. Why didn't you stop 9/11?
>>685035297
>misconception #1
"This ship can't sink."
- Captain of the Titanic
>>685035687
*I had
>>685034848
We've already got a gargantuan self-powered nuclear fusion reactor constantly emitting more than enough energy to power the entire planet.
It's called the sun. Invest in solar.
>>685035880
this
>>685035613
No the magnetic fusion reactor you fucking halfwit.
>>685035687
ITER - read up on it you fucking clown.
>>685035727
By all means, feel free to explain to me how it's physically possible for a molten salt reactor to melt down.
I submit Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors for your approval.
Nice meme about the Titanic by the way. Unfortunately, advertising slogans are not the same thing as physical facts.
>>685035188
Damn, when did France go all Fallout?
>>685034848
I don't like nuclear energy because i'm scared of explosions
Fuck you OP
>>685035880
Solar panels are toxic after their life is up
>>685036379
"Meme"
>>685035880
What happens when the sun goes down moron? Good luck storing that power.
Nuclear is just as clean, far more reliable, cheaper, and fuels like Thorium are extremely abundant. It's also less environmentally invasive. So called "green" energy always takes up massive amounts of room.
>>685036552
>explosions
the worse thing you'll get out of a reactor is nuclear contamination, they don't explode like a nuclear bomb would
the power of god
>>685036360
You mean a device fusing the nuclei of atoms to generate power? What's the term for when nuclei are fused? Could it be "nuclear fusion"?
Please do the world a favour and ask your doctor about sterilization.
>>685036673
chernobyl
I flavor the energy grape. I'm not sure what flavor is nuclear. I have to the searchings this word. Is anybody flavor the apple when vomit energy grape insofaras?
>>685036659
>So called "green" energy always takes up massive amounts of room.
And then there's the fact that for most "green" technologies, the waste from manufacturing them far outweighs what they save over their expected life.
>>685036360
NIF master race
>>685034848
>cancerous views
>nuclear energy
Kek
>>685036840
That's easy, just don't turn off all the fucking safety overrides before throwing the reactor into a dangerous test.
"Immediately after the anguish of those days, the sun will be darkened, the moon will give no light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken."
>>685036360
Like I said, I admire your clairvoyance in knowing what a disaster a reactor that hasn't been completed is going to be.
Off yourself. Fusion reactors aren't my area of expertise, (I'm more interested in breeders) but it's obvious that you're just fearmongering because your 8th grade science teacher told you that nuclear was bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vifYelSTlMo
>>685034848
Have you ever even played Fallout? Lawl
>>685036379
There's no way we can see for it to fuck up, until it does.
>>685036755
Ahh yes, sky lasers. How could I forget those?
MOAR THORIUM REACTORS PLZ
>>685036418
It won't.
>>685037173
this
>>685036659
>>685036565
Why when anyone mentions solar energy do people automatically assume photovoltaic panels?
>>685037163
I never said it was going to be a disaster.
Learn to read.
The picture is you.
>>685036552
Don't build light water reactors then. LWRs are obsolete and if you use modern designs instead then every single argument against nuclear power vanishes.
>>685037237
ikr
Shit's everywhere. Where do they put it after mining? Back in the hole? A lake? Fed to a Nigerian?
>>685034848
Fuck you Hillary Clinton staffer, I'm not buying into your nuclear energy schemes.
>>685037201
just people takin pics of missiles going of bruhhhhhthur
>>685037173
>There's no way we can see for it to fuck up, until it does.
That's not as deep or insightful as you think.
>>685037355
Wasn't there some relatively new giant glass ball that had really good energy returns?
>>685037355
If you want to use other means of collection, it'll be far less efficient and you'll need to cover even MORE land to use it.
And it's STILL only working half the time, at best.
>>685034848
Post this shit in sci and you will get rekt faggot
>>685037549
I didn't say it was, it's basically human condition to learn from mistakes.
>>685037530
No, clearly they want to use the sky lasers for power. That makes sense, as he said "power of God' in a thread about energy.
>>685036659
>nuclear
>clean
you're a fucking moron man its incredible you believe that like wow. You are so fucking stupid man its crazy i cant even right now you know? you are such a fucking idiot like wow WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!
>>685037712
If mirrors aren't real, how can our eyes be real?
could we not lock all the tumblerinas in a room and harness the power of their righteous indignation?
>>685037734
>it's contained though.
>landfills are clean because they are contained.
>>685037402
>when the fusion reactor in France goes online and proves just how obsolete and dangerous nuclear power is
You're right, "disaster" was not the exact wording you used. Feel free to substitute the original wording in for "disaster," and everything I said will still be true, you fucking mongoloid.
>>685037726
nah i was trying to be all epic and say that nuclear is told of in le bible.
i guess not on your /b/. they do have lasers that will shoot missiles but they call them something else
thorium reactors are far less dangerous than uranium, but thorium doesn't have weapons grade byproducts, so no mass market appeal
>>685037355
>Why when anyone mentions solar energy do people automatically assume photovoltaic panels?
solar updraft towers
>>685037173
In that case, I am extremely concerned about the dangers of solar power. I don't want a solar power plant to explode near my home or my future children, so I will vote against it.
I know you didn't specifically recommend solar, but that's what you sound like. You're retarded. Your statement can be applied to literally anything.
>>685038165
>thorium reactors are far less dangerous than uranium, but thorium doesn't have weapons grade byproducts, so no mass market appeal
thorium is not cost effective, it runs at 2000 degrees and uses corrosive salts.
>>685034848
How did that work out for Chernobyl, Long Islannd and Fukushima?
Hey.. let's not talk about how these 'clean' reactors are actually thousands of times more dangerous than most US coal plants. Don't forget that mentioning how they are constantly leaking, or the fact that they are in serious disrepair states across the US. Going decades beyond their normal operation usage. What could go wrong..
Nuclear Engineering Intern here
AMAA
>>685036565
As opposed to your life being toxic now.
>>685037173
>There's no way we can see for it to fuck up, until it does.
non physicists talking about physics.
I have a BSc in Physics (not that it matters) but that shit is plain wrong
>>685038310
What's your favourite curtain material?
>>685038287
and they don't make massive areas of land uninhabitable for 10,000 years when they go wrong.
>>685038296
Chernobyl happened because Russia
No one died in Three Mile island, and it was user error
Fukushima happened because of a tsunami
>fuck you
>>685037611
Plants have been converting solar energy into chemical energy since before the first multicellular organisms crawled out of the oceans.
Coal is basically just stored solar energy. So are crops. Unless you're talking geothermal then pretty much all energy sources originated as solar but we're just shit at utilising it because we're acting like all those sources are infinite.
If we didn't waste so much land and energy on useless shit then the problem would be more or less sorted out already.
>>685038310
are the majority of incidents that occur around nuclear power plants related to their old age, or could they happen to the most modern designs used today
>three mile island
>chernobyl
>fukashima
>>685038296
lol this is a troll but I fell for it.
Nuclear is the safest per terrawatt hour of any energy source including renewable. Google it if you don't believe me. NASA recently came out with a study saying it's prevented 1.8million+ deaths that would have been due to externalities from coal and oil plants. Plants are lasting past decommission date because they are built so steadily and can continue to last. Nuclear plants are unbelievably safe environments. The only plants I know of that have "leaks" are boiler plants but that only extends to the parking lot which you need security clearance to get into anyways, and it's a level lower than normal background radiation.
>>685035188
Um, isn't magnetic fusion also a form of nuclear power?
>>685034848
I mean, I think Nucular energy is definitely cleaner than coal and more efficient than most others. But the real question is, what if shit gets fucked up?
>>685037875
TELL ME HOW YOU CONTAIN RADIATION SAFELY FOR 10-200000 YEARS
WHERE THE FUCK DO YOU PUT THAT SAFELY FOR THAT FUCKING LONG
>>685037149
build a fire, chill with your bros and the next day, we all start on building a new su oh wait we could just use that nuclear reactor OP was yammerin on about. fuck it, we good
>>685038781
Send it towards the sun
>>685038781
store it in a crystalline medium then put it in a cave under a mountain.
>>685038781
just send it to the moon
>>685038310
With nuclear fusion is it ever going to be possible to have a net gain in energy since you need to at least equal the energy output of the reaction in order to contain it safely and then each stage of conversion you lose some of it before it ends up finally as electric?
Doesnt matter what ya'll think brah, CO2 turbines the next thing in high-energy density power production.
>>685035687
You can't stop what the nwo wants!
Just keep being sheep
Jet fuel can't melt Steel beams!
Jet fuel can't melt Steel beams!
Mister, propane is clean burning and efficient. Sweet lady propane is my only energy source, ill tell ya hwat.
>>685038540
>next UN meeting on climate change mitigation
>/b/ delegate has the room
'Get rid of useless shit'
>rapturous applause
>cheers of joy
>climate change solved
>>685038532
>Blames Russia - Yet uses basically the same technology.
>Claims that no one died from the hot particles..
>Tsunami's are terrorist.
These are all prime examples of shit that can and does go wrong.
Better ban those Tsunami's, Earthquakes, Meteors, Hurricanes, Tornadoes and Human Error. Hue
>>685037734
On the off chance that this is not an ironic post:
Unlike fossil fuels, which release waste into the atmosphere, nuclear power plants only release easily contained solid waste. This is only a problem because our obsolete reactors are so inefficient, and give off so much of the stuff. When we burn uranium, we are only using as little as ~.5% of its energy potential.
Contrast this with a breeder reactor, which creates more fissile material as it goes. (Using some other fuel, which is where the thorium meme comes from.) In a thorium reactor, you'll have far less waste, and of the waste you do have, 85% of it only needs to be stored for a short period of time. There is the remaining 15% which needs to be stored for 300 years, but this is easily done.
It's especially easily done when you consider that 4 or 5 thousand tons of thorium could power the ENTIRE WORLD FOR A YEAR.
>>685038781
Some shitty country?
>>685034848
This so fucking much. Today OP was not a faggot
>>685038419
explain how magnets work
>>685038287
>not cost effective
>orders of magnitude more common than uranium
Corrosive salts and high heat are both easily accounted for.
>>685038929
"Put fat people in giant wheels attached to generators and force them to give all that energy back to society."
>instant utopia
>>685038213
>Your statement can be applied to literally anything.
That's right. Now stop being butthurt over solar power and try to notice what situation has the best worst outcome.
>wind farm might crush a guy
>solar farm might take light away from the grasses underneath the location
>meltdown leading to centuries of area contamination and hundreds of deaths
The worst explosion you're going to get from renewable energy is electronic. If you've ever worked in a trade you'll know what a risk assessment is, try doing one of those for a nuclear reactor. Now do one for a bunch of giant fans.
>>685038296
>let's not talk about how these 'clean' reactors are actually thousands of times more dangerous than most US coal plants
First off, I'd like to see your statistics for this, because you're wrong.
Secondly, you're talking about Light Water Reactors. As has been mentioned in this thread a thousand times, those are demonstrably obsolete and dangerous.
>>685039172
>That the fat could be utilized in a manner that is more efficient than muscle tissue.
>Look Mom, I'm being edgy on the internets.
>>685038959
>300 years
That's actually quite impressive. Go forth and build me some of these forium protractors.
![Fukushima-power-plant-Japan[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QFlyOXI.jpg "Fukushima-power-plant-Japan[1].jpg")
>>685036840
You sound like one of those fuckwits who doesn't understand how or why chernobyl happened,
Read up on chernobyl, educate yourself
Understand how many people had to fuck up and how many fuckups had to come together to make that happen, and how rare it would be if there was a competent staff.
Now, if you want a good example on why nuclear energy isn't very safe, I would use Fukushima as an example. No human error, the place was simply hit by an earthquake and tsunami.
>>685039302
who gives a shit. no one cares hippie. you're dumb and gay also too
you're just here to jack off to people disagreeing with a jackass tier opinion
>>685038557
Highly recommend you read up on these as they're all really really interesting.
>Three mile island
Happened due to an inability to accurately and sensibly transfer information. There was a maintenance problem, and no good way to figure out what the problem was, one problem led to many small problems and a few big ones, and the control centers at the time were not equipped to discern small alarms from big alarms, so the smaller problems were prioritized essentially, which led to it having to be shut down. It's more complicated than that but the short answer is no, it wouldn't happen because control rooms have been revamped to display more information and prioritize alarms, and maintenance errors happen far less frequency due to the indepth nature of procedures.
>chernobyl
dumbass mistake, russian plant decided to turn off a reactor to see how long the turbine would spin if a shut down happened. Many other reactors were asked to perform the experiment and denied it for a reason. They then proceeded to turn on extra coolant valves (which they are never supposed to do) which caused the reactor's pressure to build higher. technically yes it could happen but it would only happen if many, many federal laws and regulations were broken, and would require almost 100+ people to agree in helping them be broken
>fukishima
another dumbass mistake, built on/near a huge fault line and in a very typhoon heavy area. Knew they could have installed safeties before hand but didn't. Didn't put out a full response team because they were scared of panic. Could technically happen again but won't. Companies (including the one I'm working at) have spent billions to ensure it wouldn't happen to them since the accident.
All of these accidents occurred due to poor planning/execution in the 60-70s and have been almost 100% remedied since
Retard OP there isn't enough enriched uranium available to have Nuclear energy for even half the world if we wanted it.
>>685039302
>meltdown leading to centuries of area contamination and hundreds of deaths
Confirmed for not reading the thread.
India seems to be the only nation taking thorium seriousy.
you gonna let the poo in loo brigade beat you to the glory?
>>685038917
According to the current law of physics, no IIRC. I'm not big into fusion, I know the push is for cold fusion but AFAIK perpetual motion is currently 100% impossible, which means net + energy definitely is as well.
>>685038441
lead
>>685038941
Basically the same tech
With half of the same safety procedures
Plus not as well built facilities in the first place because cutting corners because USSR.
>NO ONE DIFIRED IN THREE MILE ISLAND YOU CUNT
Because tsunamis can hit mainland Japan and other countries, right?
Because nuclear plants don't already have a fuck load of safety procedures and systems in place for most natural disasters (like a tornado is gonna cause a meltdown) by people who know what the fuck they're doing.
>pretty sure you're not a nuclear physicist either
>and I'm just repeating what my friend told me who wrote a whole damn college essay on this
>>685036379
let the slavs run it....
where theirs an idiot theirs a way....
>>685035188
Assuming it ever does come online, they're so far behind the roadmap, and terribly over budget.
Daily reminder that if all of the nuclear waste ever was collected into one area, it would only fill a surface the size of a football field 8 feet deep.
>>685039518
>hippie
Sorry for wanting a cyclical energy system that can sustain us rather than leading to an inevitable failure just to say 'in hindsight we should have done it better'
>>685035727
Hay asshole. IF A NUCLEAR REACTOR GO'S CRITICAL AND THE FUEL MELTS DOWN IT **CAN NOT** REACH SUPERCRITICAL MASS AND CAUSE A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION. THE MATERIAL IS NOT RICH ENOUGH.
The Fukoshema reactor buildings had a buildup of hydrogen gas due to down electrical systems and flooding causing an explosion. Same thing with Chernobyl, gas buildup and boom.
Pebble reactors (gen 3+) are technically impossible to release nuclear materials because the fuel is inside graphite pebbles like a M&M. Even if the pebbles weren't cooled and went critical and began melting the material is completely contained. Instead of making the reactors "melt down proof" it is best to use a fuel that is individually self contained.
>>685039548
thanks anon
>>685038540
This isn't an argument. You're basically saying that none of the objections to solar power and how shit it is matter because "if we were plants we'd be fine."
News flash: plant metabolisms stop at night. (with exceptions) We still need power 24 hours a day.
>>685036783
lol rekt
>>685038941
look at >>685039548
>>685039486
never underestimate the ability for people to do stupid shit... even in groups... even when properly educated... even when the odds of it happening are improbably small...
>>685039918
good. stop caring about gay shit
>>685034848
I'm for nuclear, but solar is something that we should focus more heavily on. And I don't just mean more efficient panels. I mean fucking figuring out how to harness the full power of our fucking sun, and eventually others. I'm talking taking the steps that will eventually lead to Dyson Spheres. Solar is the fucking future.
>>685035001
All other forms of energy have caused more problems than nuclear. It's like how people are afraid to fly, but jump in their car without batting an eye, even though flying is statistically much, much less likely to lead to injury or death.
>>685039761
>>pretty sure you're not a nuclear physicist either
Because you're one, and you frequent /B/, right?
>>685034848
Thorium reactor
>>685039120
They stick to each other. Magnetomes are the elementary particle which have +1/2 stickiness in ferrous materials. Thermal and sexual excitation leads to the forming of doner magnetomions within PN semierectors thus increasing their stickiness. Hence a magnet is born.
>>685039921
>These byproducts will never mix causing a catalyst of shit.
>If anything can go wrong, it won't.
>>685039753
That's a bit heavy for curtains anon. And not particulary attractive.
>>685039906
but you wouldn't want to play football there....
>>685040085
I have three perk points in nuclear physicist, faggot. My fusion cores last twice as long.
>>685040041
That I can agree with
If the japanese, the shining beacons of efficiency can fuck it up (not saying they are, but that's how they're viewed) then I guess anyone can
>>685040124
buddy you just gave me a boner
>>685039486
>no human error
Lol read up on Fukushima, there were massive oversights. It was build on a huge fault line, in a tidal zone, and the company knew it had to upgrade it's protection from these dangers but didn't. It had human error just like chernobyl, it just was on a corporate level instead.
>>685034848
Nuclear energy is efficient clean and not nearly as scary as media makes it out to be
>>685040333
Trips confirm.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/22/jacobson.nuclear.power.con/
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/issues/nuclear/
https://www.rt.com/news/339763-disaster-nuclear-earthquake-japan/
>>685040333
whats it like when the shoot out
>>685040021
wonder what the long term affect on my dealers pot plants metabolism is... pretty sure he leaves the grow lights on 25/7
>>685039302
You're ignoring your own premise. The laws of physics state that the worst explosion you'll get from renewable energy is electronic, just as the laws of physics state that the worst meltdown you'll get from a liquid salt breeder is nothing.
Please learn to read and then come back.
>>685040333
Hard to argue with that.
>>685040425
clean like chernobyl and fukushima
>>685040085
Did you not even read what I said?
My friend did research for this for four WEEKS, and got an A on the paper.
He knows ten times more about this shit than either of us, and if you were reading half of the other posts that replied to yours you'd know you've already been blown out of the water.
Fuck you, fuck your bullshit, fuck your life, fuck your ideas, fuck your argument, fuck whatever institution educated your dumbass, fuck your ISP for allowing you to have an internet connection, fuck your job for allowing you to have money, fuck your parents for raising you, fuck your grandparents, fuck your great grandparents, fuck your whole bloodline, and have a nice day.
>>685039486
>>685040041
>>685040420
Maybe if people weren't building light water reactors then there would be no chance of this shit
>>685035880
it is also among the most expensive to produce, maintain, and takes up far more space and time to create one coal plant day's worth of energy.
Solar energy is useless until we figure out how to concentrate it more efficiently
>>685039921
>Hay asshole. IF A NUCLEAR REACTOR GO'S CRITICAL AND THE FUEL MELTS DOWN IT **CAN NOT** REACH SUPERCRITICAL MASS AND CAUSE A NUCLEAR EXPLOSION. THE MATERIAL IS NOT RICH ENOUGH.
>The Fukoshema reactor buildings had a buildup of hydrogen gas due to down electrical systems and flooding causing an explosion. Same thing with Chernobyl, gas buildup and boom.
>Pebble reactors (gen 3+) are technically impossible to release nuclear materials because the fuel is inside graphite pebbles like a M&M. Even if the pebbles weren't cooled and went critical and began melting the material is completely contained. Instead of making the reactors "melt down proof" it is best to use a fuel that is individually self contained.
>>685040124
Kek wat?
![_venus1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/y2IiAb1.jpg "_venus1[1].jpg")
>>685039906
Or, we could, you know, just send it to the fucking sun in a rocket.
Or to Venus?
Why the fuck not
Why hasn't this been discussed?
The only thing I can think of is that it would cost a lot to get it off the ground, but once it leaves the atmosphere, if the trajectory is planned correctly, it would blaze through space with no extra propulsion.
Don't send it to Mars just in case we decide to go there one day
Just send all the nuclear waste to Venus or to the sun.
Not like we're ever going to go there
>>685038879
spent fuel rods are left in cooling pools for 10 years and after those 10 years are up the rods are still so hot they can kill you if you are standing 3 feet away from it.
>>685040701
trust me, human error cares not what kind of reactor you run....
>>685039617
>confirmed for not reading the thread
I''ll say this once.
>IMPLYING URANIUM
>>685040617
Caused by a series of natural disasters very very unlikely to happen in any other country
>>685040694
Well since he got an "A" from someone... must be true.
Hue
>>685039120
this would be tl;dr, there's so much shit
>>685038604
>"MAGNETIC FUSION"
>>685034848
Nuclear energy is terrible. They dig radioactive material out of the ground, they use some of it, then they put the less radioactive leftovers back into the hole they dug it out of. That's terrible.
>>685037855
Dubs tell the truth
>>685038879
forget about it after a couple hundred years and a few revolutions... eventually build a school overtop of it....
probably for the best that the romans didn't split the atom...
>>685040851
because what happens if the fucking rocket explodes while it's leaving our atmosphere? Nuclear material spreads around the world
>>685040851
The reason we don't do that is because if something goes wrong with the rocket, (worst case scenario it explodes in the atmosphere) you have a large amount of radioactive waste floating to the ground over a large area.
There are three things that prevent it from being ideal. 1 It is more dangerous than other reactors to the surrounding areas. 2 no way to dispose of used fuel source, must be stored. There are no long term studies on the possible effects of this storage. 3 The pollution to the water coolant which is typically released through rivers and into other bodies of water. It is HEAT (<- thats the pollution) that can disrupt the local environment.
Other than that it has many positive aspects that I completely support, but you only asked about cons
1. Nuclear's far cleaner than anything else we have out there.
2. RBMKs (Chernobyl) were a beyond shitty reactor design that no one else uses besides actual Russians now (everything in former soviet countries have been shut down) and even those have improvements.
3. Fukushima performed as expected and all the safety systems worked. It's expected that in an incident like that the batteries take over and can last 24 hours before emergency diesel generators kick in and theoretically can last as long as it takes to reconnect the plant to the grid. The tsunami wiped out the generators and as it just so happened, the rest of the grid in the immediate vicinity that could be used to power the coolant pumps after the batteries died.
4. Thorium is meme bullshit. We're much better off using high temperature gas reactors utilizing natural uranium and high temp helium as coolant.
BTW, my degree is in this bullshit and I work with reactors every day.
>>685040701
stop talking out your ass, even LWRs for the most part are safe, with Boiling water reactors being the exception, but most are pressurized.
>>685038781
Store it in the same place it's been stored for the past 6,000 years since God create the earth?
>>685040532
Nothing, they keep going as long as there's light
>>685040982
This. Physics graduate also, I couldn't be fucked with explaining magnets. Also explain what? Their effects? The causes of magnetism? Go into fucking gaussian shit, fuck that for a basket full of potatoes.
>>685034848
Nuclear Power is generally pretty good, but there could be that rare chance that it explodes which makes people paranoid.
>>685040211
SPEAK YOUR REASONING IN SENTENCES FAGGOT.
You are wrong.
>mix causing a catalyst
wot faggot?
>>685040973
>just fuck the entire education and research system
>just fuck literal mountains of data supporting nuclear energy as a safe and reliable energy resource if done correctly
>just fuck facts
Okay. You win. You're right. You just know better than literally all the scientists in the world and years of evidence and engineering.
>invest in a noose
>>685040851
because you have no idea how expensive that would be or the potential of a rocket exploding in atmosphere and raining radioactive dust and debris around or just choose to talk out the side of your neck instead
Hydroelecticity is the best power source.
>>685040851
because if the rocket fails or explodes your going to scatter radioactive material over a disturbingly large area.... you can't put heavy shielding on it like the usual concrete and steel containers because your trying to make it fucking fly... and if you sent it up in "safe" amounts the cost to do so would be so high you could just burn dollar bills in a steam boiler to make electricity instead of screwing around with nuclear power anyway...
also most global nuclear powers would get really nervous about you putting nuclear material (even spent) on top of a guidable rocket... regardless of where you say your gonna send it....
>>685040875
Please explain how you can stand within 3 feet of something that is buried hundreds of feet underground.
>>685040731
That's because fossil fuels is solar energy that plants converted into chemical and then never utilised it. All we're doing is releasing said energy so of course it'll be cheap and easy.
You seem to only be thinking of photovoltaics though. Even growing crops is harvesting solar energy.
>>685036861
>>685040694
>fuck your argument, fuck whatever institution educated your dumbass
>>685041387
>>just fuck the entire education and research system
You really need to work on your trolling.
>>685041068
>>685041068
>They dig radioactive material out of the ground, they use some of it, then they put the less radioactive leftovers back into the hole they dug it out of. That's terrible.
Yeah, sure, I mean, if you spend all day shuffling words around, you can make anything sound bad, anon
>coal and oil
>They dig and frack fossil fuel material out of the ground, they use some of it by burning it, then they release the CO2 into the atmosphere. That's terrible.
>>685041217
When you argue with these retards, you have to take it to their level. They'll grab on to the slightest chance of failure and yell that it's not good enough, because the results would be catastrophic if it actually happened. You have to show them something that physically cannot melt down and then shove it in their faces until they realize their mistakes.
>>685040851
because we don't want to piss off the solarians or the venetians... we are blind to their sight based attacks...
>>685040907
Human error can't make something out of nothing. If there is no physical way for a meltdown to occur, then it won't.
>>685034848
Fusion power
The superior version of nuclear power
>>685041153
It's very risky. Most of the material we have isn't highly irradiated. It is improbable to launch thousands of tons of waste. The better solution is injecting it into our mantle absorbing it into the center of the earth.
>>685041669
I was referring to what he was doing
Just saying fuck you to all those things I listed
I know this may not be probable
It may not even possible or even something further than that
But if one of you nuclear niggers invents somtehing at your job. I want you to call it NUKTAR
>im..... dead....
>>685041580
yeah this is the dumbest shit I've ever heard
They're in spent fuel tanks because of the ridiculous radiation they put off and since water is such a good blocker of radiation. What's gonna kill you is the radiation they put off, not their heat.
>>685034848
Hey, thanks for the reminder, guy!
>>685041910
>>685041580
oh but also, you're a dumbass too because spent fuel is in fuel tanks in nuclear facilities, not buried underground. Google it, he was right about that part
>>685041735
can't melt down, but thorium/molten salt reactors are still too expensive to be viable until a carbon tax is implimented
>>685041068
Doesn't sound terrible to me.
>>685038959
>>685039398
do you idiots know where the fuck thorium is found? do you know how long you have to enrich it before it turns to fissile U-233? how much energy that action in itself takes? how big do you think these centrifuges are bro? its not easy to get let me tell you man or find. did you know Afghanistan is the only place in the world with thorium on the surface aswell as lanthanum, cerium and neodymium? thats another story sorry lol. but yeah guys no joke the sun is our only hope, and somehow harvesting lightning bolts :P
pic unrelated
>>685041634
It's ok. The retarded childern and tumblrinas will mentally exhaust soon.
>>685039921
you might want to research what critical and super critical actually mean...
>>685041735
>Slightest chance for failure.
Thats why there has been more than thirty-some-odd 'accidents', right?
>>685034848
Uranium's still finite, faggot. Solar's where it's at.
>>685041192
>Thorium is meme bullshit
Can you explain? Educate me anon, I want to keep BTFOing hippies but I don't want to be a dumbass
>>685042013
the tanks are buried underground dumbass
>>685042148
>>685042148
>somehow harvesting lightning bolts :P
whoa anon, this is heavy
>>685041840
engineers have been saying this about shit since the dawn of time....
the thing is you don't know what you don't know.. you can try to predict and plan for every scenario, but you can't actually think of every single last one...
>>685034848
>radioactive hydrogen poisoning the planet
>legal "leaks" and run-off
>cancer trails around waterways by sites
you're delusional, or a shill. Either way, you're evil and what's wrong with the world.
>>685042208
>solar
>not finite
wait for a supervolcano or any large meteor hit
what about harvesting the energy created from high energy proton collisions
>>685040914
cherno was operator error and bad practices
>>685042273
I am >>685038310
I have seen them with my eyes. They are just a few flights of stairs underground, and have operations going on around them often, including people who physically dive into the pools when necessary. It's not like they're buried and away from all of civilization
>>685042589
>It's not like they're buried and away from all of civilization
>what are deep geological repositories
>>685042589
Like baywatch?
>>685034848
>voters.
says it all.
>>685042589
but still, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2010/ph240/thompson2/
the guy was arguing against vitrification because it's currently stored in water and gets hot
ITT, intelligent people try to explain the benefits of nuclear power to underage bait and autistic NEETS.
I don't know what you expected lads, /b/ is not a smart enough board to have a reasonable discussion about this.
>>685038888
ON DA MOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNUUUHHH!!!!!! BEEEEYAAATCH!!!!
>>685042888
Maybe after they're removed from the pool they eventually go far away but the point I'm making is they aren't going to kill you from 3 feet away, unless you're in a fucking operating reactor 3 feet away. It won't kill you 3 feet away in the water and it won't kill you after their cool down period when they're out of the water.
>>685042904
exactly like this
>>685043050
radiation = energy so the water will heat up, but like I said, divers swim in it to perform maintenance. It's not going to boil you.
>>685035188
former ITERfag here
are you referring to the fusion reactor that will not produce any power whatsoever? the fusion reactor that is scheduled to run for like 100 seconds and then cool down for a few hours? as opposed to what we have now that runs for two years and has to be refuelled for 5 or 6 weeks.
the fusion reactor is nothing and anybody who endorses it proves that they know nothing about which they speak
>>685043645
also I'd like to make this clear that none of this is "insider info" or anything. It's all a google search away and literally in the top 5 results if you don't trust me
>>685043645
Ah, I misunderstood your point
i just want to make a point for all you uneducated fucks that think you know anything about nuclear power. when a reactor is critical it means that it is creating power at a constant rate. super critical means power is rising. subcritical means power is lowering. reactors are critical and supercritical every single day. you watched a movie somewhere created by someone just as retarded as you got the wrong information.
>>685043808
Haven't outages been cut down to ~2 weeksish?
>>685043645
No, the point in your own words was "not like they're buried underground", which they are. No cop outs.
>>685038888
sure, declare war on the moon men, you savage earther.
>>685036360
I did read up on ITER when I worked on the project. it is not going to produce any power. it is just for research. it is not even scheduled to run for more than a minute or so each go.
>>685042201
This is why I don't even try to argue in favor of LWRs. At the end of the day, even if you won that argument, you would still be wrong, because they're obsolete.
>>685044133
The hope is that it will lead to breakthroughs that will allow us to build reactors that DO produce power. As of now, fission is the only viable power source. Fusion is the hope for the future.
>>685038888
Yes, because nothing could go wrong. Like the rocket exploding mid-air and coating the earth with radioactive isotopes.
>>685044055
They are at my reactor, just talked to my roommate who interned at a different one and they aren't at his. And regardless of this, it has nothing to do with the argument that was originally being made, they could be buried miles below the surface, doesn't change the fact that getting within 3 feet of them in the pool or after they've cooled down won't kill you.
Nuclear power is manly
>>685042307
Why don't you apply that to every project then? Why aren't you afraid of your local solar power plant causing a black hole? You don't know what you don't know.
What if by using nuclear energy we inadvertently create this motherfucker
>>685042260
Few reasons:
1. As has been stated salt mediums are corrosive and there's only one current alloy that's been known the withstand molten salt corrosion (and only then in small amounts): Hastalloy. To build an entire reactor out of that requires a lot of metallurgy work that still needs to be done. And even taking that into consideration, I don't think it's even been made since the 60s. Also, look into all the problems the Russians had with molten salt reactors; they are abundant.
2. Yes, thorium exists in much higher concentrations, however, it's rather diffuse in the earth's crust. Uranium, on the other hand, is rather concentrated in several spots. Additionally, thorium mining and refinement is a relative cottage industry compared to that of uranium.
3. We can actually get much higher utilization of uranium fuel by fission U-238 (the by far more abundant isotope of uranium) on the fast neutron spectrum. U-238 exists in droves and in amounts that we would never really need another fuel. It's essentially a limitless fuel supply. This doesn't even take into account the useful fuel we can get from recycling techniques pioneered by the French.
4. Neutron/fuel interaction data is very well established when it comes to uranium fission, not so much for thorium. So there still requires a lot more research in the actual neutronics in thorium fuel before it's truly useful.
TL;DR the science and industry revolving around uranium is already well established and can provide just as much benefit as creating a thorium industry (which would require non recurring engineering cost, both monetarily and research wise). If somethings not broke, why try to fix it?
>>685044206
>accidents
What defines an "accident" and if they're so dangerous why is nuclear the safest energy per terrawatt produced
>>685042057
Thorium reactors are mostly snake oil. The most safest designs are pebble reactors, zero leakage, can't meltdown.
The ultimate solution is starting a powerful xray or microwave energy release to kick start fusion of deuterium and tritium (hydrogen isotopes H2 & H3) nuclei together forming helium and radical neutrons releasing energy and kicking other radical hydrogen ions together.
Fusion is the future and will still release radiation. The issues with fission is you can make bomb out of the fuel. With fusion you can not.
>>685044375
I think people misunderstood you, and thought that you were defending >>685040875
We all know he is an autist, but not all tanks are underground.
>>685037691
post this in sci and you will get rekt fgt
>>685042148
>do you know how long you have to enrich it before it turns to fissile U-233
Irrelevant once there's a supply line.
>how much energy that action takes
Easily compensated by the payout.
>not easy to get
It's literally everywhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occurrence_of_thorium
At least do your research.
>>685044606
which is what I said in the post you're replying to.
ITT: people who didn't pay attention in high school chemistry don't understand that nuclear plants use a controlled fission reaction to heat water into steam to drive turbines, rather than burning coal or disrupting the flow of rivers.
Plus we get to build this shit
>>685044385
because a mild fuckup at a solar plant isn't gonna increase cancer rates over an area visable from space...
also you don't think solar plants have their own wierd problems? talk to pilots... ask them how much they like flying around those large mirror fields... also you should see what happens when a bird fucks up and flies in front of a solar collector..... fried chicken quick.
sure you say you have a design that won't melt down. but what about say some kind of steam explosion that scatters radioactive dust into the airstream?
you do apply it to every project, but some projects are inherently more risky than others and warrant a healthier level of caution.
>>685044464
I'm on your side dude. I don't think LWRs are dangerous. But it's essentially an irrelevant argument and these idiots have even less ground to stand on if you refuse to debate them on it.
>>685044375
I'm not the anon that said getting within 3 feet will kill you, I was just triggered when you said nuclear waste doesn't get buried in >>685042589.
>>685044881
>because a mild fuckup at a solar plant isn't gonna increase cancer rates over an area visable from space
How do you know that? You don't know what you don't know.
>>685041735
With pebble reactors and gen 4 reactors it is impossible for fuel release. They can't argue against that. It simply can't go critical even if some jackass grabs the fuel out the reactor it still is safe unless he gets a plasma or water cutter and cracks open the pebbles.
>>685042322
Go die you uneducated hippie
>>685044813
the most metal art ever....
>>685039617
Wrong. Russia has been flooding the market with Uranium driving the price down. They caused the new fuel processing plant in Idaho to be delayed indefinitely.
>>685044933
It doesn't necessarily get buried when put in spent fuel pool is what I'm saying though. It does eventually, but the pools themselves are not always buried, which is what I said in that post.
>>685037691
>thinking /sci/ would be against nuclear
You're an autist
>>685045025
okay, fair, let me rephrase, a mild fuckup at a solar plant isn't as likely to increase cancer rates over an area visible from space.
>>685034848
I fully support nuclear energy. Whether it be fission, fusion, molten salt using spent fuel, etc..
But other good forms, if we can perfect them, are solar, wind, hydro etc..
>>685034848
nuclear is the worst when it comes to pollution. seems like you are the faggot
>>685042322
>radioactive hydrogen
>cancer trails around waterways
nice b8 m8
>>685045112
Yeah, the idea is to make the area around yucca mountain look metal af so if society collapses or something, people won't settle there
>>685034848
Still pollutes.....
>>685045154
Then we have come to an understanding.
>>685041192
Yes. +1 on Thorium being bullshit for fags
I mean yeah nuclear energy is a great way to go but eventually we'd really just want all solar
>>685044697
The problem is enrichment of thorium isotopes is extremely hard and not worth the energy effort.
Btw im not the one you replied to.
>>685045319
how does one capture the essence of "you should leave this place and not return" and convey it for all time....
>>685045259
>nuclear is the worst when it comes to pollution. seems like you are the faggot
Blatantly not true, a correctly functioning coal power plant releases more radioative particles than a correctly functional fission plant.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
>>685041542
Yeah its very good. You can't really scale it up though.
>>685039356
>implying excess fat is NOT stored energy
>>685045225
It's just as likely as the same result from one of the modern breeders. At least, assuming you're trusting engineers and not your own possibly flawed intuition.
So I'll ask again, how do you know that? You don't know what you don't know.
>>685045468
That's exactly the problem, you have to consider the possibility of some morons worshiping it like some real life Church of atom
>>685036840
Not an explosion. That was a containment failure. If it had been a nuclear explosion the reactor site and most of Pripyat would not exist.
Nuclear explosions cannot occur in a reactor.
>>685045567
if we could figure out how to harness wave energy in an efficient manner that didn't involve snaking transmission lines all over the ocean to do so we could get some pretty good results...
half tempted to say you could use the electricity produced on site to make hydrogen and then ship that back to the coast to run fuel cells... gotta get past that "highly explosive" bit though....
>>685044445
Thanks anon.
>>685037691
clearly never been to sci..
autismalert
>>685045939
sorry let me rephrase that.
Outages have cut down to 2-3weeks
>>685045624
to be fair my own flawed intuition has never inspired it's own show. have you ever watched engineering disasters? it's chocked full of engineers who knew they'd designed the unbreakable... and the unlikely and unsuspecting ways it all went wrong and broke.
I'm not saying it's likely. I don't even mind nuclear power to be honest. but saying that ANY kind of reactor is absolutely safe and above failure is pretty much just asking to be proven wrong.
>>685037855
That's how the Matrix first began.
>>685045736
>all praise to the atom and his blessed towers >his warm embrace sustains us.
Nuclear is the only source for which all technicalities can possibly be eliminated with existing technology.
Fossil fuels are finite and inherently dangerous to the environment. While byproduct from nuclear reactors can be managed/reused, fossil fuel byproduct pollutes the atmosphere, to say the least.
Geothermal, solar, wind, etc.. suffer from efficiency problems and, though technically should be able to produce energy with no problematic byproducts, the technology is still being developed. Solar has amazing potential, and certainly has its place as an energy source, but at this time nuclear is the better answer due to efficiency, output abundance, and as others have said, general safety.
>>685044058
we should do more lunches like this, so much pop and circumstance.
the only good energy source is helium 3
>>685045259
I think your brain is polluted..
>>685046425
I support lunches with giant artillery... best way to enjoy a sandwich
>>685045319
yeah but you would still want to party there
>>685043808
>blowing out the ass
>implying fusion power isn't possible and or probable
Read faggot >>685044580
>>685046479
Better get to work on the Jupiter fleet.
>>685042322
go smoke some more of what ur on cus its clearly effective
>>685046385
Of course, in the long term, everything is finite.
I also note that any and all forms of energy generation have inefficiencies and will release heat into the environment, which becomes a "problematic byproduct."
>>685040269
Metal af tho
>>685046623
He's saying that ITER isn't for generating power, it's for researching fusion power so we can make one that generates power later
>>685038941
>Chernobyl happened because Russia
happened in russia and gave everyone in europe cancer
>No one died in Three Mile island, and it was user error
humans are almost always the cause of error and since we use the machines that operate the plants it's safe to assume this will happen again
>Fukushima happened because of a tsunami
fukushima had three backup plans and they all failed
anyone else excited for dark matter plants?
>>685034848
Chernobyl
/thread
>>685038959
Question we to hippie fags care about how long isotopes are radioactive. We just need to burry it deep. Problem solved. The earth will recycle the material.
Japan loves hating on America for using nukes in World War 2.
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster happens in 2011.
Nuclear fallout spreads to America.
Japan still hates on America for using nukes.
>>685047125
didn't read the thread
/thread
>>685046385
/thread
>>685035001
>pic related
>>685035579
oh 4chan. how you make me giggle so
>>685041571
Even if it worked you'd need to burn hundreds of tons of rocket Fuel and waste a multi million dollar vehicle to get rid of a few hundred pounds of spent fuel.
>>685036565
>Solar panels are toxic after their life is up
They're made out of sand. They are as toxic as rocks...
>>685047277
>reading threads
that shit's for the birds, anon
>>685047274
this
>>685047274
>Japan loves hating on America for using nukes in World War 2.
They don't though. They're bro-tier about it.
>>685046623
Fusion will be to hot for us to effectively take the heat away. The whole making steam and spinning a turbine for electricity side of the plant isn't even on the drawing board currently. You will need a miracle for that to happen. Being able to produce and control a reaction 30 years down the line still leaves you with no electricity.
>>685047451
And meth is made from cough syrup
>>685034848
Alrite, cuck, you stepped in to my territory. Propane is the best fuel source in the universe. A stable, organic, easy to synthesize stably hydrocarbon that burns cleanly and consistently with minimal pollution. Non-toxic, not radioactive, no radioactive waste, large supply, reusable, and does not risk nuclear explosion. And if you think that cars should run on nuclear, you haven't even thought about the sand niggers.
>>685046987
>happened in russia
really? tell me more
>>685035727
IT's not an oil rig that they nigger rigged. If done properly, no pressure or effluent escapes. I believe the new ones recycle the same water. fun fact, pure water can't be irradiated.
>>685036659
>Good luck storing that power.
If only there was a way to store electrical energy...
fuck maybe some day we'll come up with a solution. Until then, I guess it's impossible.
>>685046861
This is usually where I start talking about space, and how it would be easier to maintain equilibrium on planet Earth through the ability to introduce and remove heat/energy and materials.
