The abstract says "this is the first candidate outside our own solar system to have direct evidence for water clouds." Which is true in the sense that water in star spots is vapor and not condensed. However molecular clouds often have water ice in them and so might be considered water clouds if condensation is the criterion. This is cool discovery.
Fuel in water cooled reactors is clad and most of the neutrons are intercepted by water before the reactor vessel is exposed. The cladding is changed with the fuel so it only has to last a year or two at high irradiation. After that it lingers at after heat conditions in a spent fuel pool. But in a molten salt reactor, the reactor itself sees a hard neutron spectrum and is damaged just like the sacrificial cladding (which is not meant to last all that long under power production conditions). No wonder it does not last and cracks after only a short period of use.
They seem to be happy at $4/MMBtu but they would like to hook into the global market at $10 which would offshore our recovering industry again. Strategic should be the watch word on natural gas.
Since China has already agreed to GATT, invoking Article XX carbon tariffs on their imports ought to be a solution that avoids more costly and risky approaches.
Looks like the tsunami risk is mostly from underwater landslides in that part of California. These can be started by an earthquake. But the risk will depend on the details of the sea floor near the plant. http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/g...
"Following the AP report, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee announced it would hold hearings into how the NRC has handled Peck’s recommendation. Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat who chairs the panel, said in a statement she’s alarmed his report has lingered at the agency for a year. “The NRC’s failure to act constitutes an abdication of its responsibility to protect public health and safety,” she said." http://www.theepochtimes.com/n... Here is one way to close the barn door.
"PG&E research in 2011 determined that any of three nearby faults — the Shoreline, Los Osos and San Luis Bay — is capable of producing significantly more ground motion during an earthquake than was accounted for in the design of important plant equipment. In the case of San Luis Bay, it is as much as 75 percent more."
The issue does not seem to be the Hosgri fault, three miles away, but rather the "Shoreline fault, which snakes offshore about 650 yards from the reactors." Also, "PG&E research in 2011 determined that any of three nearby faults — the Shoreline, Los Osos and San Luis Bay — is capable of producing significantly more ground motion during an earthquake than was accounted for in the design of important plant equipment. In the case of San Luis Bay, it is as much as 75 percent more." With the offshore fault, do you have any feeling how the plant would do with a zero warning tsunami? Perhaps the fault only goes sideways and that it is not an issue?
Gas and oil extraction seem a little different. Oil is still taken from a reservoir layer though with new geometry while gas is now being taken from the source rock itself. That seems to explain why gas is holding at a low price in the US.
Who should I believe, a respected laboratory, NREL, or some guy on the internet who can't be bothered to do math? Regarding Vermont, HydroQuebec is ready to cover Vermont Yankee. California should be obvious and it doesn't use coal. http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/17...
Since nuclear is becoming uneconomic using existing plants more expensive uranium should not be included in reserve estimates. http://will.illinois.edu/nfs/R...
Solar and wind back each other up. http://www.engineering.com/Ele... It's nukes that go out for weeks at a time needing typically fossil replacement energy. Shut them down permanently and wind and solar and hydro will rush in to replace them. Look at Vermont, heck look at California which recently closed another nuke.
Slashdot Mirror
The abstract says "this is the first candidate outside our own solar system to have direct evidence for water clouds." Which is true in the sense that water in star spots is vapor and not condensed. However molecular clouds often have water ice in them and so might be considered water clouds if condensation is the criterion. This is cool discovery.
You've missed the residential solar in that list.
Annually replacing the reactor leads to a great deal of high level waste.
You seem to be mistaken on that as well. http://www.mercurynews.com/bus...
Go back to the link. NREL even did the math for you.
You really don't do math do you?
Fuel in water cooled reactors is clad and most of the neutrons are intercepted by water before the reactor vessel is exposed. The cladding is changed with the fuel so it only has to last a year or two at high irradiation. After that it lingers at after heat conditions in a spent fuel pool. But in a molten salt reactor, the reactor itself sees a hard neutron spectrum and is damaged just like the sacrificial cladding (which is not meant to last all that long under power production conditions). No wonder it does not last and cracks after only a short period of use.
They seem to be happy at $4/MMBtu but they would like to hook into the global market at $10 which would offshore our recovering industry again. Strategic should be the watch word on natural gas.
Since China has already agreed to GATT, invoking Article XX carbon tariffs on their imports ought to be a solution that avoids more costly and risky approaches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
If it is beyond the design criteria, perhaps it is a big deal.
Looks like the tsunami risk is mostly from underwater landslides in that part of California. These can be started by an earthquake. But the risk will depend on the details of the sea floor near the plant. http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/g...
The technology was tried and it failed. And, the clean up was hugely expensive as well.
Sounds like you are suffering from wishful thinking.
"Following the AP report, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee announced it would hold hearings into how the NRC has handled Peck’s recommendation. Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat who chairs the panel, said in a statement she’s alarmed his report has lingered at the agency for a year. “The NRC’s failure to act constitutes an abdication of its responsibility to protect public health and safety,” she said." http://www.theepochtimes.com/n... Here is one way to close the barn door.
The gasoline tax is for road repair. It really should be an axle weight tax, but to call it a fossil fuel tax is a mistake.
"PG&E research in 2011 determined that any of three nearby faults — the Shoreline, Los Osos and San Luis Bay — is capable of producing significantly more ground motion during an earthquake than was accounted for in the design of important plant equipment. In the case of San Luis Bay, it is as much as 75 percent more."
The issue does not seem to be the Hosgri fault, three miles away, but rather the "Shoreline fault, which snakes offshore about 650 yards from the reactors." Also, "PG&E research in 2011 determined that any of three nearby faults — the Shoreline, Los Osos and San Luis Bay — is capable of producing significantly more ground motion during an earthquake than was accounted for in the design of important plant equipment. In the case of San Luis Bay, it is as much as 75 percent more." With the offshore fault, do you have any feeling how the plant would do with a zero warning tsunami? Perhaps the fault only goes sideways and that it is not an issue?
Gas and oil extraction seem a little different. Oil is still taken from a reservoir layer though with new geometry while gas is now being taken from the source rock itself. That seems to explain why gas is holding at a low price in the US.
Who should I believe, a respected laboratory, NREL, or some guy on the internet who can't be bothered to do math? Regarding Vermont, HydroQuebec is ready to cover Vermont Yankee. California should be obvious and it doesn't use coal. http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/17...
Since nuclear is becoming uneconomic using existing plants more expensive uranium should not be included in reserve estimates. http://will.illinois.edu/nfs/R...
Solar and wind back each other up. http://www.engineering.com/Ele... It's nukes that go out for weeks at a time needing typically fossil replacement energy. Shut them down permanently and wind and solar and hydro will rush in to replace them. Look at Vermont, heck look at California which recently closed another nuke.
molten salt reactors crack to pieces after a couple years' mild use.
The Humboldt Bay reactor closed for the same reason.
Karen Silkwood. Perhaps the long nightmare is coming to an end.