keeping active components of RTG at a distance and as they gradually decay bringing them closer together. Additionally a gradually increasing concentration of neutron reflective materials can be added as components get closer together. This would slow decay of radioactive materials and reduce temperature in the beginning potentially reducing size of radiators. This should also increase period of time for which RTG can be active by using variably reflective neutron mirrors.
"Maybe for his next project he can invest billions in a solar farm of 50 square miles to generate a 500 kilowatts!!"
I think you are mistaken by at least an order of magnitude. But you are right. There are much better uses for that area. Like 1/10 of a coal or (even better) uranium mine, somewhere preferably where people can actually live. Like not a desert or a high altitude plateau. Hopefully close to ground waters too (cus we wouldn't just want miners families to share the joy). See what kind of new birth defects doctors can discover in the name of science. It's a good way of delivering power of atom into every home. Though I personally prefer pure proton fusion. Then you don't get any of the radioactive fallout.
Master, it appears your heart has stopped. Creep Crafters inc. is slashing prices on everything from coffins to liquid nitrogen. Would you like to know more?
Panels are too expensive to manufacture. Currently there are 2 ways to deal with the problem none of which are economically acceptable for a house. Both use arrays of mirrors that focus on a single point which could be either high efficiency solar panel capable of operating under extreme temperatures or something that heats salt. As far as I know only thermal solar power has been applied, in two commercial power plants. There is a reason for that. Black pipe doesn't need to be replaced as often as uber high tech high efficiency solar panel capable of withstanding 600C or more. It's funny may be you could combine both since whatever solar cell missed can be collected as heat.
On the side note how long do you think it takes to pay off a mine or a rig? I takes fucking decades. 40-50 years? Ok may be not a rig since it's a portable mine. I suppose depends on type of mine but investment is sick. Sure it's viable now, but sun unlike oil will not run out any time soon which removes the need to move solar plant. Solar plants have a lot less moving parts (gas pressure controlled array alignment) than a rig and mirrors decay at a much slower rate than solar panels do. It's all about mass production. If there was a way to stamp low tech solar plants... All we need is mirrors. A lot of them. It's just technology is dumb as a brick and because of that solar power plant can last for a veeeery long time.
There are ways to enrich spent fuel. I think USSR was pretty good at that and I presume technology wasn't lost. Any reactor fuel can be enriched and reused for the rod manufacturing using centrifuge based density separation. Appearantly relatively small loss of Uranium concentration in rods makes them close to useless. Problem is (appearantly) that it's cheaper to mine uranium than to enrich spent fuel. Right now we dump that fuel underground into either storage facilities or back into mines where it happily decays (or worse places). I think it's a major waste because fissile materials are only economical way for humanity to make a (controlled) matter to energy conversion.
But anyways, I think use of Plutonium for reactors is a very good idea. Unfortunately with Plutonium it's too easy to deliver power of atom into every home if you catch my drift. So I do not believe Plutonium can become available because it makes some people tipsy. Ok, it makes a lot of people tipsy... literally if you are stand close enough to be able to piss without a flash light.
On another note some Uranium deposits are so rich that they are impossible to mine. Even in Africa.
There can be no such thing as internet2. Net is a concept. Protocols can be revised but there can be no net2. It's just net, like gravity. May be Montana has something to add?
Unless Wikipedia article about solar power is completely and utterly mistaken, the amount of solar power that reaches Earth surface exceeded amount of energy consumed by entire human civilization in 2004 by the factor of 8174.
That would imply that less then 0.5% of earth surface dedicated to collection of solar power using nothing but sterling engine (30% efficiency) would be required to meet the demands of entire human race in 2004.
Wow! Now that is some error!
As far as bacteria and biofuels go... well screw that. If US government has invested war money into R&D there would be no oil problem... anywhere.
When I think about thinking, threads come to mind. Unfortunately after pondering about it for 10 minutes or so I figure my unconscious decision making background processes came to following conclusion:
My friend called this dehumanization:) Him and another guy automate most bureaucratic BS with perl scripts. For everything else there are another 2 people. I should get him "Go away or I will replace you with a very small script" shirt for birthday:)
Some nice batteries are coming up now (someone mentioned we have portable computing to thank for that, which makes sense). I think it's the way to go because infrastructure is already present and just needs to be slightly upgraded. Not to mention it will probably stimulate development of solar power which is nice because it's a way to partially decentralize grid. Hydrogen is a highly volatile fuel that needs to be created and transported. That creates an additional energy cost due to an additional step, which is the case with oil based products as well. Does humanity really need that kind of energy sink due to inefficiency? I mean even if there was an efficient way to produce hydrogen, why add extra production step and a whole new type of infrastructure?
Slashdot Mirror
keeping active components of RTG at a distance and as they gradually decay bringing them closer together. Additionally a gradually increasing concentration of neutron reflective materials can be added as components get closer together. This would slow decay of radioactive materials and reduce temperature in the beginning potentially reducing size of radiators. This should also increase period of time for which RTG can be active by using variably reflective neutron mirrors.
The goggles!!! They do noooothing!
"Maybe for his next project he can invest billions in a solar farm of 50 square miles to generate a 500 kilowatts!!"
I think you are mistaken by at least an order of magnitude. But you are right. There are much better uses for that area. Like 1/10 of a coal or (even better) uranium mine, somewhere preferably where people can actually live. Like not a desert or a high altitude plateau. Hopefully close to ground waters too (cus we wouldn't just want miners families to share the joy). See what kind of new birth defects doctors can discover in the name of science. It's a good way of delivering power of atom into every home. Though I personally prefer pure proton fusion. Then you don't get any of the radioactive fallout.
You can't hide forever Anonymous Coward. Nazis are soon coming to get you.
Master, it appears your heart has stopped. Creep Crafters inc. is slashing prices on everything from coffins to liquid nitrogen. Would you like to know more?
Panels are too expensive to manufacture. Currently there are 2 ways to deal with the problem none of which are economically acceptable for a house. Both use arrays of mirrors that focus on a single point which could be either high efficiency solar panel capable of operating under extreme temperatures or something that heats salt. As far as I know only thermal solar power has been applied, in two commercial power plants. There is a reason for that. Black pipe doesn't need to be replaced as often as uber high tech high efficiency solar panel capable of withstanding 600C or more. It's funny may be you could combine both since whatever solar cell missed can be collected as heat.
On the side note how long do you think it takes to pay off a mine or a rig? I takes fucking decades. 40-50 years? Ok may be not a rig since it's a portable mine. I suppose depends on type of mine but investment is sick. Sure it's viable now, but sun unlike oil will not run out any time soon which removes the need to move solar plant. Solar plants have a lot less moving parts (gas pressure controlled array alignment) than a rig and mirrors decay at a much slower rate than solar panels do. It's all about mass production. If there was a way to stamp low tech solar plants... All we need is mirrors. A lot of them. It's just technology is dumb as a brick and because of that solar power plant can last for a veeeery long time.
There are ways to enrich spent fuel. I think USSR was pretty good at that and I presume technology wasn't lost. Any reactor fuel can be enriched and reused for the rod manufacturing using centrifuge based density separation. Appearantly relatively small loss of Uranium concentration in rods makes them close to useless. Problem is (appearantly) that it's cheaper to mine uranium than to enrich spent fuel. Right now we dump that fuel underground into either storage facilities or back into mines where it happily decays (or worse places). I think it's a major waste because fissile materials are only economical way for humanity to make a (controlled) matter to energy conversion.
But anyways, I think use of Plutonium for reactors is a very good idea. Unfortunately with Plutonium it's too easy to deliver power of atom into every home if you catch my drift. So I do not believe Plutonium can become available because it makes some people tipsy. Ok, it makes a lot of people tipsy... literally if you are stand close enough to be able to piss without a flash light.
On another note some Uranium deposits are so rich that they are impossible to mine. Even in Africa.
There can be no such thing as internet2. Net is a concept. Protocols can be revised but there can be no net2. It's just net, like gravity. May be Montana has something to add?
Unless Wikipedia article about solar power is completely and utterly mistaken, the amount of solar power that reaches Earth surface exceeded amount of energy consumed by entire human civilization in 2004 by the factor of 8174.
That would imply that less then 0.5% of earth surface dedicated to collection of solar power using nothing but sterling engine (30% efficiency) would be required to meet the demands of entire human race in 2004.
Wow! Now that is some error!
As far as bacteria and biofuels go... well screw that. If US government has invested war money into R&D there would be no oil problem... anywhere.
"duct tape is like The Force - it has a light side and a dark side, and it binds the Universe together"
What the fuck do you know about soviet russia? Much less about what was or wasn't before. "beaurocracy"? Fucking idiot.
When I think about thinking, threads come to mind.
Unfortunately after pondering about it for 10 minutes or so I figure my unconscious decision making background processes came to following conclusion:
catch (WtfException omgwtf)
{
generateHeadache(MIGRAINE);
}
as cleverly named stack popped something other than its element.
How about making computer literacy mandatory. It should solve a lot of problems.
My friend called this dehumanization :) :)
Him and another guy automate most bureaucratic BS with perl scripts. For everything else there are another 2 people.
I should get him "Go away or I will replace you with a very small script" shirt for birthday
Must be all the desperate people taking Vista quiz to win a polo shirt...
http://www.microsoft.com/australia/vistafacts/fact.aspx
Some nice batteries are coming up now (someone mentioned we have portable computing to thank for that, which makes sense). I think it's the way to go because infrastructure is already present and just needs to be slightly upgraded. Not to mention it will probably stimulate development of solar power which is nice because it's a way to partially decentralize grid. Hydrogen is a highly volatile fuel that needs to be created and transported. That creates an additional energy cost due to an additional step, which is the case with oil based products as well. Does humanity really need that kind of energy sink due to inefficiency? I mean even if there was an efficient way to produce hydrogen, why add extra production step and a whole new type of infrastructure?
"People who are involved in open source typically love programming (otherwise, why do it?)."
Masochism.
... Alcor. They are much more user friendly.