This is just another teenage rebellion movement like Libertarianism. "Don't trust the old people. They're just trying to oppress you!" Yes, Libertarians, you are now the old guys who can't be trusted.:) As such you and your philosophies must be rebelled against much like you tore at the chains of your oppressor parents in the two party system.
None. The AP-1000 is the first new design to be approved by the NRC in 30 years. The agency is structured in such a way so nuclear will die a slow death in the United States. Probably the only option for long term new reactor designs is in China, and possibly the Czech Republic.
Yeah, 2030 is a realistic estimate for deployment.
We will need to scrap existing plants as they age out, but many of them can run for decades more. The best bet for newly built plants are the AP-1000 and their ilk.
I suggest you look into 4th generation designs, especially the modular ones which do not require pressure containment. They have a much smaller carbon footprint.
We're not there yet. Until we are efficiency is useful. Don't get me wrong, I think we should electrify everything, but you should always use the resources you have as efficiently as is prudent.
I usually don't reply to ACs, but I must respond to the stupid.
Building solar panels takes resources. Marshaling resources takes energy. You may not get more energy out of the panels than you put in to build them, install them, and maintain them. They also degrade over time.
Bottom line is no form of energy generation comes for free. It should be used as efficiently as possible and not wasted.
Awesome that you can make technology projections in that time scale, especially when few can even project accurately even twenty years into the future. Bravo.
To be fair thorium reactors are not 100% proliferation proof, but they are much better than light water uranium based reactors. It all comes down to passive safety. With passive safe designs it is much more feasible to seal the reactor vessel, and with sealing comes greater proliferation resistance.
The grid infrastructure you're referring to often requires significant upgrading to handle two way electricity flow, and/or significant use of batteries.
Slashdot Mirror
This is just another teenage rebellion movement like Libertarianism. "Don't trust the old people. They're just trying to oppress you!" Yes, Libertarians, you are now the old guys who can't be trusted. :) As such you and your philosophies must be rebelled against much like you tore at the chains of your oppressor parents in the two party system.
None. The AP-1000 is the first new design to be approved by the NRC in 30 years. The agency is structured in such a way so nuclear will die a slow death in the United States. Probably the only option for long term new reactor designs is in China, and possibly the Czech Republic.
Yeah, 2030 is a realistic estimate for deployment.
We will need to scrap existing plants as they age out, but many of them can run for decades more. The best bet for newly built plants are the AP-1000 and their ilk.
I suggest you look into 4th generation designs, especially the modular ones which do not require pressure containment. They have a much smaller carbon footprint.
Nuclear reduces carbon. Why is it not an option?
Does increasing emissions cut the world any slack?
Sure there is something they can do.
Turn the reactors back on.
Why? Simple: Fear.
Yes, and the water has been raised 0.000001 degrees.
If we switch to molten salt based thorium we'll have thousands of years of fuel.
We're not there yet. Until we are efficiency is useful. Don't get me wrong, I think we should electrify everything, but you should always use the resources you have as efficiently as is prudent.
Your first response is nonsensical.
How many panels? How much resources? You ignore these questions because answering them destroys your platitudes.
How much physical resources would it take to build the panels necessary to harvest infinite energy? How much land area?
The only thing infinite in this situation is the stupidity required to believe that any resource is infinite.
I usually don't reply to ACs, but I must respond to the stupid.
Building solar panels takes resources. Marshaling resources takes energy. You may not get more energy out of the panels than you put in to build them, install them, and maintain them. They also degrade over time.
Bottom line is no form of energy generation comes for free. It should be used as efficiently as possible and not wasted.
That said, the majority of my electricity consumption when there is no solar power available is lighting.
This may be true for you, but some parts oft he world get cold at night.
And as for your "you can waste all you want from wind and solar" premise, that's just sheer lunacy. No resource is infinite.
Awesome that you can make technology projections in that time scale, especially when few can even project accurately even twenty years into the future. Bravo.
To be fair thorium reactors are not 100% proliferation proof, but they are much better than light water uranium based reactors. It all comes down to passive safety. With passive safe designs it is much more feasible to seal the reactor vessel, and with sealing comes greater proliferation resistance.
Physical Readiness Test?
Primary Response Team?
Poor Righteous Teachers?
Pave the Earth!
The grid cares.
I guarantee you the. Koch brothers love renewables. They'll let them greenwash natgas forever.
Low density living is not sustainable.
The grid infrastructure you're referring to often requires significant upgrading to handle two way electricity flow, and/or significant use of batteries.
And what about "night" when, I shit you not, the sun doesn't shine...