Actually, the old reactors DO need to go away. But all of them need to be replaced with GE PRISMS. Look, we have a number of plants that are LOADED with 'waste' fuel. Well, in addition, they have cooling, connections to the grids, barriers around them, and loads of equipment on site for dealing with steam power, such as generators. Basically, the PRISMS will not only give us back power, but will massively reduce the waste. All while increasing the amount of power AND increasing profits.
In fact, I wonder if most of the money that was set aside for handling waste, should not be used to buy these PRISMS? Thank about it. This will reduce the amount of waste by 85-90%, and drop the lifetime for the waste (from 20K+ years to 200 years), while providing LOADS of new money for dealing with future waste (which will actually be a fraction of what it is today).
Keep in mind that I support the PRISM for current sites, but not for new ones. For new ones, thorium is the way to go. Likewise, thorium should replace about 1/2 or more of our coal plants.
Actually, the coal plants that are going out were scheduled to be gone (they were built in the 30's-50's). They are quickly being replaced by NG plants as well as wind/solar (more wind, rather than solar). Our actual electricity capacity is RISING, not shrinking.
Actually, we CAN get plenty of solar as well as other AE to power us at 10x where we are at. The problem is not one of capabilities, but of economics. AE is still expensive. That is why we need a MIX of energy.
Now, with that said, I maintain that the SMART move is to create a national bill that requires that all new buildings below 5 stories to have 90% of their HVAC be handled by on-site AE. With that approach, it would actually encourage new technology for any number of things. This takes advantage of the fact that solar PV is VERY expensive at this time.
The fact is, that if we would add a couple of GE PRISM at all of the nuke sites, either running, shutting down, or shut down, we could burn up the vast majority of the 'waste'. From there, what would remain in 100 years, would fit easily in a corner of WIPPS and last only 200 years. Oddly, this would make loads of money for the plants while pretty much using up all of the 'waste'.
In addition, all of the new sites should be switched to a thorium cycle. Very safe to run and at a fraction of the price.
BTW, I am with my 5 y.o. son this moment watching 'Mars Rising' on SCI channel while waiting to grab some lunch.
He is asking questions about it and likes this.
My 8 and 5 y.o. LOVE this stuff. So do their friends that I have spent some time teaching to. early NASA was a BIG todo because we had a large number of engineers and scientists in America. Now? We have a bunch of money-grubbing weenies. We put out lawyers who want to sue, and financial idiots that studied at the school of short-term profits. As such, ppl watch films about legal drama and rich ppl, rather than learn how to make things.
You want your kid interested in science and space? Then fucking focus on them and get them into it.
Finally, if we can get the GD neo-cons out of the way, shut down the SLS, restore funding to mars efforts AND to private space esp. wanting to go to the moon, then we will see a lot of interest. Right now, we spend 10's of billions with neo-cons throwing money at their districts, rather than allowing NASA to do the right things.
Sad that you say so much, with so little behind it. When we first started landing rovers on the moon, it was in preparation for landing man on the moon. Because the moon has no atmosphere, the landers come in SLOW and it is 1/6 G, it made it fairly simple on how to land. Mars is different. We have to arrive a great deal faster, we have an atmosphere to deal with, and 1/3 G. As such, there are MANY more issues to landing there. This was actually, one of the most difficult landings done on a planet since the early days. We could only test parts of it. No way to fully test it.
BUT, from here on out, we will see larger payloads going to mars. In fact, the next American one might be red dragon. That would double the amount of science on Mars. The same craft can be used on the moon to land cargo AND humans.
Zero chance. It comes down to the nuke power supply. We no longer have the Pu-238 for another mission. Sadly, CONgress is busy fighting about it. The dems want to allocate the DOE to allocate the 100 M for it, while the republicans want NASA to pay the 100 M for it.
Real geeks know how to make things stay up. Sadly, non-geeks will use an OS that lets you down all the time. And loaded with disease.
No doubt, that post will lead to many with horns screaming tomorrow
You do not know what you are talking about. Windows is the bes888798se98wer9w8erwerwer....
Then from another system, they will say that as soon as they get rid of the virus on that windows, they will create a new chant to bring the true dark one over to my house to install Windows on it. Like I am really going to invite in Bill Gates into my house. Then I will have NO power against him.
I know. Oddly, the best thing that can happen for all of these companies is not to own 100% of a small market, but to be a major player in a very large and expanding market. SpaceX AND NASA are making that happen. And make no mistake, that if NASA had not been involved with SpaceX, we would be NOWHERE near where we are today. I have to say that it kills me inside every time that I see somebody screaming that they want to kill off NASA.
Now, if we can get Bigelow (and perhaps IDC Dover) up there with one or two stations, then I have no doubt that even Liberty will have plenty of work on the commercial side. Even Skylon will be needed for a major advancement to the moon and mars.
I agree with most of what you said. To be honest, Boeing makes good sense. They are a capsule on the same rocket as SNC. In addition, the atlas is WELL tested. It is expensive, but a well tested rocket really is needed. I believe that F9 is awesome esp. due to its costs and construction, but it will have 7 or so trips when humans start flying.
Yeah, I absolutely was not a fan of ATK getting the bid. I hate the fact that the neo-cons were putting a full court press. I hate the fact that the tea party kept quiet about that. Heck, I think that even some dems supported ATK's bid, even though it make ZERO sense.
I believe (hope?) that SpaceX can get FH off the ground safely in 2013. I think that if they can do that, it will remove money from SLS. I would very much like to see SLS killed and a new COTS-SHLV started. Offer up 5 billion for 5 years to develop a rocket that can take ~150 tonnes to LEO for TWO different systems. The launch costs MUST be below.5B. Then after 5 years, open up a bid for 2 launch systems (and it can be any American companies with at least 85-90% American systems) of ~150 tonnes to LEO. They will bid for 3 years for 2 launches a year. Of the 2 winners, the lower bid / tonne to leo will get a 3rd launch / year. IOW, reward the winners of the winner with a bit more.
You can read about it on the web. Here let me help you. Or are you looking for proprietary information that China and their competitors would dearly love to get ahold of?
Lets see, the F9 will have flown 7-9 times by the first dragonrider. The dragon itself will have gone up at least 5x. Even the specs on the entire launch system is at more than 140% of what NASA wants which is 125%.
Atlas, which is the core of SNC and CST-100 has flown MANY times. It is currently being outfitted with sensors, but it remains the same launch system.
Boeing has a LONG history of building space systems.
SNC will probably have the least experience and testing, and yet, NASA looks over every aspect of what they are up to.
So, explain to me what is unsafe with these companies and their products.
LOL. All of the companies that won money have nothing but safety being put first. Heck, SpaceX even outdoes the specs that NASA requires and that NASA has not met with any of their old systems. Atlas is being upgraded with many sensors. CST-100? Same way. Then you have DreamChaser which is undergoing similar things.
These are going to be as safe, or more likely even safer, than anything developed to date.
NASA has less pork than you can image. They 3 main issues.
The first is that they do true cutting edge work. Nothing cheap about that. True R&D involves a LOT of money.
The second is that they are forced to farm out much of the work. That used to be a good thing until congress pushed them into cost+. Once it became cost+, then the gravy train rolled for the contractors.
CONgress controlls the money and the projects. The REAL problem is not NASA, but CONgress. Look at the damage that the republicans have done over the last 17 years to NASA. The republicans killed the original COTS in mid 90's. Transhab and vasimr (as well as other projects) were likewise killed by the republicans back in late 90's. Clinton had to beg and then stand up to the neo-cons to get all of this transferred to private companies. Then again, the republicans gutted the ISS removing perhaps the most important modules of the centrifuge. Constellation was severely underfunded by the republicans. The list continues on and on.
Actually, there is some surprise. The republicans were putting a full court press on NASA to NOT award to SpaceX or SNC. They wanted only old space, mainly ATK. And OSC never really had a chance. They really have nothing. OTOH SNC is much further ahead then OSC when it comes to developing something. Therefore, it makes zero sense to award OSC. Yet, again, a number of republican were busy pushing OSC.
The republicans were pushing NASA to fund Liberty with 1, CST-100 with 1, and ULA to get.5. IOW, the republicans only wanted their older expensive companies that are working on the senate launch system to have the money.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the old reactors DO need to go away. But all of them need to be replaced with GE PRISMS. Look, we have a number of plants that are LOADED with 'waste' fuel. Well, in addition, they have cooling, connections to the grids, barriers around them, and loads of equipment on site for dealing with steam power, such as generators. Basically, the PRISMS will not only give us back power, but will massively reduce the waste. All while increasing the amount of power AND increasing profits.
In fact, I wonder if most of the money that was set aside for handling waste, should not be used to buy these PRISMS? Thank about it. This will reduce the amount of waste by 85-90%, and drop the lifetime for the waste (from 20K+ years to 200 years), while providing LOADS of new money for dealing with future waste (which will actually be a fraction of what it is today).
Keep in mind that I support the PRISM for current sites, but not for new ones. For new ones, thorium is the way to go. Likewise, thorium should replace about 1/2 or more of our coal plants.
Actually, the coal plants that are going out were scheduled to be gone (they were built in the 30's-50's). They are quickly being replaced by NG plants as well as wind/solar (more wind, rather than solar). Our actual electricity capacity is RISING, not shrinking.
Coal is around 38% of our electricity and dropping. By end of this decade, Coal will account for less than 12% of American electricity.
Actually, we CAN get plenty of solar as well as other AE to power us at 10x where we are at. The problem is not one of capabilities, but of economics. AE is still expensive. That is why we need a MIX of energy.
Here is a nice company doing thorium. Hopefully, their first reactor will be at a military base SOON.
Here is how we burn up LOADS of 'waste' fuel.
Here is how we convert our 500 years+ of coal into natural gas
Basically, we have plenty of ways to get energy.
Now, with that said, I maintain that the SMART move is to create a national bill that requires that all new buildings below 5 stories to have 90% of their HVAC be handled by on-site AE. With that approach, it would actually encourage new technology for any number of things. This takes advantage of the fact that solar PV is VERY expensive at this time.
Yes, you ACs get so brave. You scream to not do something to your face, while at the same time hiding who you are. Brilliant.
The fact is, that if we would add a couple of GE PRISM at all of the nuke sites, either running, shutting down, or shut down, we could burn up the vast majority of the 'waste'. From there, what would remain in 100 years, would fit easily in a corner of WIPPS and last only 200 years. Oddly, this would make loads of money for the plants while pretty much using up all of the 'waste'.
In addition, all of the new sites should be switched to a thorium cycle. Very safe to run and at a fraction of the price.
It appears that times are a changing.
What is needed is for us to push out kids in the right direction.
BTW, I am with my 5 y.o. son this moment watching 'Mars Rising' on SCI channel while waiting to grab some lunch.
He is asking questions about it and likes this.
The kids get interested when the parents are.
My 8 and 5 y.o. LOVE this stuff. So do their friends that I have spent some time teaching to. early NASA was a BIG todo because we had a large number of engineers and scientists in America. Now? We have a bunch of money-grubbing weenies. We put out lawyers who want to sue, and financial idiots that studied at the school of short-term profits. As such, ppl watch films about legal drama and rich ppl, rather than learn how to make things.
You want your kid interested in science and space? Then fucking focus on them and get them into it.
Finally, if we can get the GD neo-cons out of the way, shut down the SLS, restore funding to mars efforts AND to private space esp. wanting to go to the moon, then we will see a lot of interest. Right now, we spend 10's of billions with neo-cons throwing money at their districts, rather than allowing NASA to do the right things.
Sad that you say so much, with so little behind it. When we first started landing rovers on the moon, it was in preparation for landing man on the moon. Because the moon has no atmosphere, the landers come in SLOW and it is 1/6 G, it made it fairly simple on how to land. Mars is different. We have to arrive a great deal faster, we have an atmosphere to deal with, and 1/3 G. As such, there are MANY more issues to landing there. This was actually, one of the most difficult landings done on a planet since the early days. We could only test parts of it. No way to fully test it.
BUT, from here on out, we will see larger payloads going to mars. In fact, the next American one might be red dragon. That would double the amount of science on Mars. The same craft can be used on the moon to land cargo AND humans.
Zero chance. It comes down to the nuke power supply. We no longer have the Pu-238 for another mission. Sadly, CONgress is busy fighting about it. The dems want to allocate the DOE to allocate the 100 M for it, while the republicans want NASA to pay the 100 M for it.
No doubt, that post will lead to many with horns screaming tomorrow
You do not know what you are talking about. Windows is the bes888798se98wer9w8erwerwer....
Then from another system, they will say that as soon as they get rid of the virus on that windows, they will create a new chant to bring the true dark one over to my house to install Windows on it. Like I am really going to invite in Bill Gates into my house. Then I will have NO power against him.
Curiosity is ON THE SURFACE.
I know. Oddly, the best thing that can happen for all of these companies is not to own 100% of a small market, but to be a major player in a very large and expanding market. SpaceX AND NASA are making that happen. And make no mistake, that if NASA had not been involved with SpaceX, we would be NOWHERE near where we are today. I have to say that it kills me inside every time that I see somebody screaming that they want to kill off NASA.
Now, if we can get Bigelow (and perhaps IDC Dover) up there with one or two stations, then I have no doubt that even Liberty will have plenty of work on the commercial side. Even Skylon will be needed for a major advancement to the moon and mars.
It is sad fact. You would think that the republicans would be major backers of it, but they hate private space.
I agree with most of what you said. To be honest, Boeing makes good sense. They are a capsule on the same rocket as SNC. In addition, the atlas is WELL tested. It is expensive, but a well tested rocket really is needed. I believe that F9 is awesome esp. due to its costs and construction, but it will have 7 or so trips when humans start flying.
.5B. Then after 5 years, open up a bid for 2 launch systems (and it can be any American companies with at least 85-90% American systems) of ~150 tonnes to LEO. They will bid for 3 years for 2 launches a year. Of the 2 winners, the lower bid / tonne to leo will get a 3rd launch / year. IOW, reward the winners of the winner with a bit more.
Yeah, I absolutely was not a fan of ATK getting the bid. I hate the fact that the neo-cons were putting a full court press. I hate the fact that the tea party kept quiet about that. Heck, I think that even some dems supported ATK's bid, even though it make ZERO sense.
I believe (hope?) that SpaceX can get FH off the ground safely in 2013. I think that if they can do that, it will remove money from SLS. I would very much like to see SLS killed and a new COTS-SHLV started. Offer up 5 billion for 5 years to develop a rocket that can take ~150 tonnes to LEO for TWO different systems. The launch costs MUST be below
You can read about it on the web. Here let me help you. Or are you looking for proprietary information that China and their competitors would dearly love to get ahold of?
Lets see, the F9 will have flown 7-9 times by the first dragonrider. The dragon itself will have gone up at least 5x. Even the specs on the entire launch system is at more than 140% of what NASA wants which is 125%.
Atlas, which is the core of SNC and CST-100 has flown MANY times. It is currently being outfitted with sensors, but it remains the same launch system.
Boeing has a LONG history of building space systems.
SNC will probably have the least experience and testing, and yet, NASA looks over every aspect of what they are up to.
So, explain to me what is unsafe with these companies and their products.
LOL. All of the companies that won money have nothing but safety being put first. Heck, SpaceX even outdoes the specs that NASA requires and that NASA has not met with any of their old systems. Atlas is being upgraded with many sensors. CST-100? Same way. Then you have DreamChaser which is undergoing similar things.
These are going to be as safe, or more likely even safer, than anything developed to date.
Actually, SpaceX does a lot of their own R&D. In addition, exactly what R&D has been done by the old space companies that they paid for.
Neither Cat scans nor MRI came from NASA. Lots of spin-offs and improvements, but not what you said.
NASA has less pork than you can image. They 3 main issues.
The first is that they do true cutting edge work. Nothing cheap about that. True R&D involves a LOT of money.
The second is that they are forced to farm out much of the work. That used to be a good thing until congress pushed them into cost+. Once it became cost+, then the gravy train rolled for the contractors.
CONgress controlls the money and the projects. The REAL problem is not NASA, but CONgress. Look at the damage that the republicans have done over the last 17 years to NASA. The republicans killed the original COTS in mid 90's. Transhab and vasimr (as well as other projects) were likewise killed by the republicans back in late 90's. Clinton had to beg and then stand up to the neo-cons to get all of this transferred to private companies. Then again, the republicans gutted the ISS removing perhaps the most important modules of the centrifuge. Constellation was severely underfunded by the republicans. The list continues on and on.
Actually, there is some surprise. The republicans were putting a full court press on NASA to NOT award to SpaceX or SNC. They wanted only old space, mainly ATK. And OSC never really had a chance. They really have nothing. OTOH SNC is much further ahead then OSC when it comes to developing something. Therefore, it makes zero sense to award OSC. Yet, again, a number of republican were busy pushing OSC.
Because somebody objects to the republicans, it means that you must support O/dems?
The republicans were pushing NASA to fund Liberty with 1, CST-100 with 1, and ULA to get .5. IOW, the republicans only wanted their older expensive companies that are working on the senate launch system to have the money.