Sigh.
first off, the part that travels on the train is the empty reactor. It is not a fully functional reactor. The reactor is still buried and covered at the site prior to loading.
However, look up Ft. St. Vrain thorium reactor. It does not generate excess neutrons so it did not have the shielding. Oddly, it IS capable of working on a train, even powering one.
Why? Has Gates announced that? The only that I have seen is that gates is in preliminary talks with China. Nothing more. And I doubt that a study was put together in 1 week and has validity.
You are in luck, since these are already here.
Thorium reactor comes quickly to mind. Pebble bed is also the same. IFR (now the GE PRISMA) also are impossible.
Take pebble beds. You create BBs that are coated with graphite. Graphite heats up AND EXPANDS. Therefor the pebbles move away from one another moderating the reaction.
My favorite is actually thorium. The Ft. St. Vrain reactor was the largest thorium reactor and it had a simple approach. Thorium is NOT FERTILE. IOW, it does not produce neutrons, so it can neither create, nor sustain a reaction. BUT uranium can. So, what you do is put uranium rods into a case. These are spaced so that a reaction can not be started. Then you put thorium rods between the uranium rods. These will take the excess neutrons and heat up. Basically, the thorium is the one that gets hot, not the uranium. In fact, you can actually drop the uranium and create articial neutrons to generate the reaction, but that is expensive. Interestingly, thorium has a LOW melting point. So what you do is put it in a matix so that it will melt if the temps reach a particular temp (say 100C below a true melt down with the uranium). Then if you do not control the thorium, it melts and the reaction stops. Simple as that. And unlike a regular reactor, the heat stops QUICKLY. After all, the thorium flowed down to a pan.
Certainly. Tell us where you live. We will be happy to send you what you have bought. In fact, we can do it within 2 hours anywhere on earth after we get your information and our verifying it.
They are. Basically, the new ones use physic and manufacturing economics to make that happen. For example, I would like to see PRISMA be developed for install at all sites that have 'waste' stored there. These would then burn up the fuel and leave nothing but short lived 'waste' (100-200 years; not 20K). Likewise, for new installs, it makes sense to go with thorium similar to what Ft. St. Vrain had. The reactor was good, just the back end was not.
There are PLENTY of ppl that would volunteer to do the mars missions today. I know that when I was single and childless, I would have done it instantly. However, long before we go to Mars, we need to test it all at Antarctica, followed by the moon. What has amazed me is that neither IDC Dover nor Bigelow have pushed to have their units go there. I would think that it would be ideal to have several of their units there. Esp. with the ability to move these around. They could serve as a quickly movable base station.
What is really lacking is a small nuke generator. I have looked at our antarctic treaty and there is nothing that prevents us from doing small nuke generators. The issue is that they must not be left there. A small thorium generator would be ideal and could taken out quickly when done. The area is so remote that it would be easy to secure the unit. But a small unit would enable loads of exploration all around the world. In particular, it could be used in the oceans, the poles, on mountain tops, etc.. A small unit that produces 100KW with excess heat would cut it.
They spent three years translating secret military documents, scouring the internet and studying satellite images for clues – and concluded that China may have as many as 3,000 missiles, compared with general estimates of between 80 and 400.
First off, it has been shown that some fracking wells CAN fail and leak fluids into the upper water areas. So, what is REALLY needed is to be able to TRACE back to a company and ideally, to a well. So, each fracking solution should contain a trace marker. But then prior to injecting, the drilling company should add a different trace marker. Ideally, they would add a different marker PER WELL as well. With that approach if the solution is found in reservoirs, then the markers would ID the frack solution, the company and the well.
Others should be a breeder reactor to burn up the 'waste' that we currently have. In particular, we should be able to put in smaller breeders into places that already have loads of stored fuel and simply transfer that over to it.
So, a good example is Zion outside of Chicago. It was closed, but still contains LOADS of 'waste'. But it also contains cooling, generators, and even grid connection. Point is, that rather than ship waste around, we can burn what is there, add to our grid, and shut down more coal plants.
the first stage DOES flyback. It is the airplane.
However, look carefully at the second stage. That is SpaceX's F5. But you notice the wings in the back? That is to make it easy enought to turn upwards, and perhaps to fly it back.
Not even close. Orbital got their tech from NASA/USAF. The ability to drop a vehicle was pioneered back in the 50's. And all that orbital did was use a dead L-1011 and somebody else's rocket (after all, OSC develops NOTHING).
I wonder how this will do with the warming that is occurring? Supposedly the models show that China's rain is suppose to drop a great deal. Perhaps this is their way of winning their cold war.
Pegasus was simply grabbing a USAF/NASA project and scaling it down (both in size and economics). They used an L-1011 and creating that. The problem is that Orbital designed poorly. OTH, Scaled has done a number of launches from their system and showed that it worked well. As such, Allen is willing to fund it. I am also going to guess that within 1 year, we will hear that he is funding Bigelow or IDC Dover to put a private space station.
The fact is that the amount of LOX to get to 50K/500 MPH is not that much. The real ECONOMIC issue is re-usability. As it is, the spaceX rocket appears to be an F 5, not an F9.
Actually, the time is coming when the west will no longer accept China's cheating on everything. Once that happens, China will have to honor all of the treaties and in particular, allow labor and money to float by market rate. Once that happens, then their costs will skyrocket.
Really? I find it interesting that you discount private space so much, when they are obviously lightyears ahead of the vast majority of the world. As it is, the largest lifter is the Delta IV H at 22 tonnes. Heck, China is working toward Long March 5 that will send up 25 tonnes, while FH will be out around the same time with more than DOUBLE its capacity at 54 tonnes. In addition, the FH will be cheaper than any LV that does more than 15 tonnes to LEO.
NASA is wasting money on that crap SLS by being forced to create a neo-con jobs bill. The good news is that it will be dead shortly after FH launches. Between FH, and something like this, SLS will die its death.
And as far as China owning the moon, even in spite of the neo-cons attempting to destroy private space, I would hazard that America will be on the moon before 2020. The fact is, that private space wants to go there. And once BA makes a run for it, every nation will want to pay to be on the moon as quickly as possible. And that will be with private space.
the reason is that the real costs of space systems are human costs and system costs. Humans are easy to lower esp. when you have a system rigged for that. Well, aviation is rigged for that. Likewise, when you take the expensive portion, the first stage and make it a re-usable airplane, you change the economics dramatically. Will this be more efficient in terms of energy? I seriously doubt it. However, at some point, we will have hypersonic flight in which crafts are doing mach 10 or more at 90K feet. If this can become the next stage, then we are looking at cheap access to space. Probably cheaper than skylon.
Of course, the ability to launch over and over quickly and from all over the US or any location would not have any value? Likewise, by building the carrier, it can be used for cargo crafts at other times.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh. first off, the part that travels on the train is the empty reactor. It is not a fully functional reactor. The reactor is still buried and covered at the site prior to loading.
However, look up Ft. St. Vrain thorium reactor. It does not generate excess neutrons so it did not have the shielding. Oddly, it IS capable of working on a train, even powering one.
Actually, some things DO get better with time. Look up IFR and GE PRISM.
Why? Has Gates announced that? The only that I have seen is that gates is in preliminary talks with China. Nothing more. And I doubt that a study was put together in 1 week and has validity.
You are in luck, since these are already here.
Thorium reactor comes quickly to mind. Pebble bed is also the same. IFR (now the GE PRISMA) also are impossible.
Take pebble beds. You create BBs that are coated with graphite. Graphite heats up AND EXPANDS. Therefor the pebbles move away from one another moderating the reaction.
My favorite is actually thorium. The Ft. St. Vrain reactor was the largest thorium reactor and it had a simple approach. Thorium is NOT FERTILE. IOW, it does not produce neutrons, so it can neither create, nor sustain a reaction. BUT uranium can. So, what you do is put uranium rods into a case. These are spaced so that a reaction can not be started. Then you put thorium rods between the uranium rods. These will take the excess neutrons and heat up. Basically, the thorium is the one that gets hot, not the uranium. In fact, you can actually drop the uranium and create articial neutrons to generate the reaction, but that is expensive. Interestingly, thorium has a LOW melting point. So what you do is put it in a matix so that it will melt if the temps reach a particular temp (say 100C below a true melt down with the uranium). Then if you do not control the thorium, it melts and the reaction stops. Simple as that. And unlike a regular reactor, the heat stops QUICKLY. After all, the thorium flowed down to a pan.
As to IFR, loaded with passive safety as well
Certainly. Tell us where you live. We will be happy to send you what you have bought. In fact, we can do it within 2 hours anywhere on earth after we get your information and our verifying it.
Otherway around. With a factory, you will have TIGHTER specs. When it is in the field, you do not have access to the same tools.
LOL; radiation is a BIG part of evolution. Why do cowards like you make such IRRATIONAL statements with zero knowledge?
They are. Basically, the new ones use physic and manufacturing economics to make that happen. For example, I would like to see PRISMA be developed for install at all sites that have 'waste' stored there. These would then burn up the fuel and leave nothing but short lived 'waste' (100-200 years; not 20K). Likewise, for new installs, it makes sense to go with thorium similar to what Ft. St. Vrain had. The reactor was good, just the back end was not.
There are PLENTY of ppl that would volunteer to do the mars missions today. I know that when I was single and childless, I would have done it instantly. However, long before we go to Mars, we need to test it all at Antarctica, followed by the moon. What has amazed me is that neither IDC Dover nor Bigelow have pushed to have their units go there. I would think that it would be ideal to have several of their units there. Esp. with the ability to move these around. They could serve as a quickly movable base station.
What is really lacking is a small nuke generator. I have looked at our antarctic treaty and there is nothing that prevents us from doing small nuke generators. The issue is that they must not be left there. A small thorium generator would be ideal and could taken out quickly when done. The area is so remote that it would be easy to secure the unit. But a small unit would enable loads of exploration all around the world. In particular, it could be used in the oceans, the poles, on mountain tops, etc.. A small unit that produces 100KW with excess heat would cut it.
China may be using thousands of miles of underground tunnels to hide a nuclear missile arsenal that is far bigger than current estimates, according to researchers.
They spent three years translating secret military documents, scouring the internet and studying satellite images for clues – and concluded that China may have as many as 3,000 missiles, compared with general estimates of between 80 and 400.
First off, it has been shown that some fracking wells CAN fail and leak fluids into the upper water areas. So, what is REALLY needed is to be able to TRACE back to a company and ideally, to a well. So, each fracking solution should contain a trace marker. But then prior to injecting, the drilling company should add a different trace marker. Ideally, they would add a different marker PER WELL as well. With that approach if the solution is found in reservoirs, then the markers would ID the frack solution, the company and the well.
SOME should use Thorium.
Others should be a breeder reactor to burn up the 'waste' that we currently have. In particular, we should be able to put in smaller breeders into places that already have loads of stored fuel and simply transfer that over to it.
So, a good example is Zion outside of Chicago. It was closed, but still contains LOADS of 'waste'. But it also contains cooling, generators, and even grid connection. Point is, that rather than ship waste around, we can burn what is there, add to our grid, and shut down more coal plants.
the first stage DOES flyback. It is the airplane.
However, look carefully at the second stage. That is SpaceX's F5. But you notice the wings in the back? That is to make it easy enought to turn upwards, and perhaps to fly it back.
If somebody like gates will pour some money into it, but do it in the west, rather than China, perhaps we can get some thing going.
Not even close. Orbital got their tech from NASA/USAF. The ability to drop a vehicle was pioneered back in the 50's. And all that orbital did was use a dead L-1011 and somebody else's rocket (after all, OSC develops NOTHING).
What is missing is building the world's first private space station. My guess is that he will back something from BA or IDC Dover in the next year.
And Charter was not so much about making loads of money, but about getting Cable industry to carry internet. And he succeeded at that.
I wonder how this will do with the warming that is occurring? Supposedly the models show that China's rain is suppose to drop a great deal. Perhaps this is their way of winning their cold war.
Pegasus was simply grabbing a USAF/NASA project and scaling it down (both in size and economics). They used an L-1011 and creating that. The problem is that Orbital designed poorly. OTH, Scaled has done a number of launches from their system and showed that it worked well. As such, Allen is willing to fund it. I am also going to guess that within 1 year, we will hear that he is funding Bigelow or IDC Dover to put a private space station.
The fact is that the amount of LOX to get to 50K/500 MPH is not that much. The real ECONOMIC issue is re-usability. As it is, the spaceX rocket appears to be an F 5, not an F9.
According to musk, 90% of the rocket launch is the labor and rocket costs. The more of it that is re-usable, the cheaper that it is.
Actually, the time is coming when the west will no longer accept China's cheating on everything. Once that happens, China will have to honor all of the treaties and in particular, allow labor and money to float by market rate. Once that happens, then their costs will skyrocket.
Where do you want to be strip searched today?
why in a strip club of course. And by the girls that are there.
Really? I find it interesting that you discount private space so much, when they are obviously lightyears ahead of the vast majority of the world. As it is, the largest lifter is the Delta IV H at 22 tonnes. Heck, China is working toward Long March 5 that will send up 25 tonnes, while FH will be out around the same time with more than DOUBLE its capacity at 54 tonnes. In addition, the FH will be cheaper than any LV that does more than 15 tonnes to LEO.
NASA is wasting money on that crap SLS by being forced to create a neo-con jobs bill. The good news is that it will be dead shortly after FH launches. Between FH, and something like this, SLS will die its death.
And as far as China owning the moon, even in spite of the neo-cons attempting to destroy private space, I would hazard that America will be on the moon before 2020. The fact is, that private space wants to go there. And once BA makes a run for it, every nation will want to pay to be on the moon as quickly as possible. And that will be with private space.
the reason is that the real costs of space systems are human costs and system costs. Humans are easy to lower esp. when you have a system rigged for that. Well, aviation is rigged for that. Likewise, when you take the expensive portion, the first stage and make it a re-usable airplane, you change the economics dramatically. Will this be more efficient in terms of energy? I seriously doubt it. However, at some point, we will have hypersonic flight in which crafts are doing mach 10 or more at 90K feet. If this can become the next stage, then we are looking at cheap access to space. Probably cheaper than skylon.
Of course, the ability to launch over and over quickly and from all over the US or any location would not have any value? Likewise, by building the carrier, it can be used for cargo crafts at other times.