A diamond with the weight of a gram is worth a small fortune. And I bet you will never be able to judge with your hand if the diamond is inside or not.
Strange that the EP does not know that it only has the power to veto and is bringing law after law into existence. How does that work? Even more conspiracy? The commision is inacting secretly the laws crafted by the EP?
Well. Their French model "Guilty until you prove innocence" justice. Neither any european state nor the EU has that "justice".
What kind of moron are you?
The fact that all the people with actual power are unelected and unaccountable. That is wrong.
as a totalitarian super-state and stealing the right of ACTUAL self-government from the member nations. Thats is completely wrong, who brainwashed you that way?
The MEPs in the European Parliament only have a right to veto. That is bollocks. The EP works exactly like any other parliament in the EU.
I wonder when we get rid of assholes like you balantly lying about the EU political system.
Who was it that decided to just give a free pass to any emigrants that came to the EU? It was Germany and their lackeys. There is no such thing, idiot!
Facebook TOS claims that I had agreed that all my posts are copyrighted by FB. That is nonsense under EU laws. My posts are copyrighted by me, who else?
Perhaps you shoukd learn to read: 99% of all PV cel neither contain gallium, nor cadmium nor the Telurium you mention here.
Those text you have does not even cover a fraction of the missing 1%
No idea why you are so bad with numbers.
And frankly, you have either quoted out of context or simply don't graps it, the mentioned power plants in your list most certainly don't use CdTe PV cells. Those are much to inefficient to be of any use for a utility.
While e.g. the german plant in Templin indeed uses "thinfilm pv cells" they are made from silicium:P and not form CdTe... wow that was easy again. Perhaps you should quote links were you know the authors have a clue and don't mix dozens of "thin film" technologies into one hat.
Anyway, all the nasty materials you arw so afraid about get mined anyway as byproduct in other mining activities. "Storing" them inside of a solar cell is probably the safest way to handle them anyway.
Of course it bounces off. E.g. for a dimple reason: there is no german news abiut this. Must be a huge conspiracy that they managed to nearly have a blackout in a grid that is interconnected with whole europe, and keep that a secret.
The people that are full of shit are those who write the fearmongering bullshit for yellow press newspapers. And of course you, as you believe that nonsense and repost it here.
E.g. here you see the load and the rough production and the price for balancing power and imported power: https://www.energy-charts.de/p...
And, what do you notice? Nothing to see there, business as usuall...
As I pointed out the original terms are extra and intra So using abbreviations with the wrong ending makes no sense.
Every modern IDE will give you an auto complete after either entering i or e... you seem not to be a programmer I want to hire.
* Short variables with meaning > long variables with same meaning. Definitely wrong, as extra and intra and extro and intro can mean anything which starts with intr and extr... I hope I never have you on my team, unless you change that attitude
Then why don't you name your variables introversion and extroversion?
There is a huge deal of people on the planet that actually speak a roman language (or got bored to death by it in school), so obviously we use intro and extra, but more precisely we would intra and extra...
Well, someone who mixes up U235 with U238 is not really that credible when we talk about nuclear "waste":P
Anyway, unless we are talking about breeder reactors, normal reactors have only 1% fissionable fuel left when the fuel is spent: so reprocessing makes not really that much sense.
Natural uranium is 99.3% non fissionable and 0.7% fissionable. To get reactor fuel you need something like 95% - 5%... usually we go for 94% - 6%.
So if spent fuel has significantly more than 1% fissionable uranium, then it makes sense to reprocess because it is already higher enriched than natural uranium. And that is the only point in reprocessing. If you reprocess you need to get all the high radioactive stuff out of it.
Bottom line it makes much more sense to just store the spent fuel instead of dividing it up into 40% unused uranium, enriching the remaining 50% uranium to a 94% - 6% ratio again and getting rid of the actinides. (Keep in mind, for a ton of reprocessed Uranium, you need another 5 - 8 tones of "fresh uranium" so you can extract the U235 from the fresh and put it into the "reprocessed" one)
Waste processing only made sense when you wanted to have breeders and use the Plutonium for bombs...
France is reprocessing. Ever been at La Hague? They have 8 reactors at La Hague if I remember correctly. More than half of them are used to run the reprocessing industry. Imagine that. They have like 70 reactors all over France and 8 to run the reprocessing site. One of the reasons why they use so much power at night, or have such a high base load.
And the radioactivity we talk about is not the Uranium but the decay products, and those are not fuel.
I really don't get why people are so dumb about how a nuclear reactor works.
You have Uranium, which is made from two isotopes: U238 and U235. The natural distribution is 99.3% U238. And the rest is U235. In ordinary reactors you can not burn that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Canadian CANDU reactors can "burn" natural uranium, but I don't know how they do it, was never interested in figuring it.
Anyway, a standard reactor in the US burns Uranium that is enriched to about 6% Uranium 235. Let that sink into you. Where does that 6% come from? We are talking about changing the 99.3% versus 0.7% ratio into a 94% versus 6% ratio. Obviously to make 1 ton of 94/6 Uranium you need about 10 tons of natural uranium and you throw away 9 tons of it as waste. That is the fist kind of waste. But the US found an easy way to get rid of it, they use it as armament for their A10 bombers and spread it all over the middle east.
And yes, it is radioactive and highly poisones.
Anyway, now lets look at the reactor again. Now you fill that 94/6 uranium mix into a reactor. Only the 6% part, the Uranium 235, is actually used as fuel. When it is spent, it is spent. Depending on reactor design, you can burn it down to 1%, often only 3%. Lets assume, best case. You burned it don to 1%.
Now you have 94% Uranium 238, 5% decay products - the so called actinides - and 1% unspent fuel left.
Given past experiences with other countries the electricity prices will keep going up as a result of shutting down the nuclear power plants. That is nonsense. A) in Germany power prices changed because of taxes and other politics, as in feed in fees B) in France electricity is heavy subsidized. If they would pay "market prices" their price would be 3 times higher.
It also is a lot more expensive in the winter than in the summer. For house hold customers. Not for a power plant that has a 10 years fixed price contract, facepalm.
Also if they import natural gas from Russia, it will be piped through Germany, which means they'll get a cut from transport passing there. They don't import any reasonable amounts of gas anyway. Your analysis makes no real sense. And the Russians are not idiots: business first. What do you care about the cut? If France exports electricity to Poland, "Germany" gets its cut, too!!
You can't run a steel smelter off intermittent power. Of course you can. You simply run the smelter when the power is there. You guys simply think that the power would be suddenly away, but it is not.
Great so what you are saying is France is converting over the energy mix Germany has ? No, they go 100% renewable, probably a bit faster then Germany even.
hat gives them the most expensive power in Europe No it does not. Power costs are actually only a very small fraction of our spendings. Because we use so less power. At some point you have to realize that most of the costs are taxes and grid costs. The grid cost does not shrink if you use less power, hence you have a perceived increase in power rates per kWh.
while they still burn brown coal because their heavy industries Are you an idiot or what? How long does it take to build a 500MW simple power plant? We can't replace coal plants faster than it takes to build replacements, moron. And the same thing is true for France. How do you come to the stupid idea they would replace nukes with coal plants? I pointed already out: they are replacing them with renewables.
Well, they are recycled. Just not to make new tetra packs from them.
However you are right, those things should be forbidden.
Anyway, the parent was more one of those wackos who claims that melting iron/steel costs more energy than melting ore. Or similar for glass. There are so many people here who thing melting bottles costs the same energy as melting fresh glass from sand.
Then there's fusion power, which has virtually zero waste products. But that's still under research. The current fusion reactors leave behind a huge pile of radioactive waste: the reactor.
Perhaps we might evolve to "neutron less" fusion reactors after we get the "simple ones" running, but except for space fare... it makes no sense. Wind and Solar and Biomass and perhaps oil from algae is much much much cheaper.
Hell, the first steam engine wasn't invented until 300 years ago. Just to nitpick... the first steam engine was invented 2000 years ago. And with first in this case: "the oldest we now about". I would not wonder if someone invented it before that time repeatedly over again.
Slashdot Mirror
A diamond with the weight of a gram is worth a small fortune.
And I bet you will never be able to judge with your hand if the diamond is inside or not.
Baseball bat and car is easy. Knife not so much ...
Strange that the EP does not know that it only has the power to veto and is bringing law after law into existence.
How does that work? Even more conspiracy? The commision is inacting secretly the laws crafted by the EP?
Well. Their French model "Guilty until you prove innocence" justice.
Neither any european state nor the EU has that "justice".
What kind of moron are you?
The fact that all the people with actual power are unelected and unaccountable.
That is wrong.
as a totalitarian super-state and stealing the right of ACTUAL self-government from the member nations.
Thats is completely wrong, who brainwashed you that way?
The MEPs in the European Parliament only have a right to veto.
That is bollocks. The EP works exactly like any other parliament in the EU.
I wonder when we get rid of assholes like you balantly lying about the EU political system.
Who was it that decided to just give a free pass to any emigrants that came to the EU? It was Germany and their lackeys.
There is no such thing, idiot!
Basically all your points are wrong.
Where did you pick them up?
no, the winners are the european citizens.
When the TOS is changed, I can put photos on facebook without fear that they steal them and monetize them.
You are confusing the crowd with to many facts!
Facebook TOS claims that I had agreed that all my posts are copyrighted by FB.
That is nonsense under EU laws. My posts are copyrighted by me, who else?
"Does this dress make me look fat?"
If you are fat: yes!
Sure, we had nearly a black out in the best grid of the world.
Instead of suggesting pills to me, perhaps you should drop the pills you are taking.
I is common knowledge that Telurium is to rare to be used for significant production of solar panels.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Anyway, you started it with the fear about heavy metals. I consider them safely stored inside of a solar panel ... don't you agree?
60% - 80% of what?
Of course it gets recycled, same for steel and aluminum. At least here in Europe.
Perhaps you shoukd learn to read: 99% of all PV cel neither contain gallium, nor cadmium nor the Telurium you mention here.
Those text you have does not even cover a fraction of the missing 1%
No idea why you are so bad with numbers.
And frankly, you have either quoted out of context or simply don't graps it, the mentioned power plants in your list most certainly don't use CdTe PV cells. Those are much to inefficient to be of any use for a utility.
While e.g. the german plant in Templin indeed uses "thinfilm pv cells" they are made from silicium :P and not form CdTe ... wow that was easy again. Perhaps you should quote links were you know the authors have a clue and don't mix dozens of "thin film" technologies into one hat.
Anyway, all the nasty materials you arw so afraid about get mined anyway as byproduct in other mining activities. "Storing" them inside of a solar cell is probably the safest way to handle them anyway.
Of course it bounces off.
E.g. for a dimple reason: there is no german news abiut this. Must be a huge conspiracy that they managed to nearly have a blackout in a grid that is interconnected with whole europe, and keep that a secret.
The people that are full of shit are those who write the fearmongering bullshit for yellow press newspapers.
And of course you, as you believe that nonsense and repost it here.
E.g. here you see the load and the rough production and the price for balancing power and imported power: https://www.energy-charts.de/p...
And, what do you notice? Nothing to see there, business as usuall ...
As I pointed out the original terms are extra and intra
So using abbreviations with the wrong ending makes no sense.
Every modern IDE will give you an auto complete after either entering i or e ... you seem not to be a programmer I want to hire.
* Short variables with meaning > long variables with same meaning. ... I hope I never have you on my team, unless you change that attitude
Definitely wrong, as extra and intra and extro and intro can mean anything which starts with intr and extr
Then why don't you name your variables introversion and extroversion?
There is a huge deal of people on the planet that actually speak a roman language (or got bored to death by it in school), so obviously we use intro and extra, but more precisely we would intra and extra ...
Well, someone who mixes up U235 with U238 is not really that credible when we talk about nuclear "waste" :P
Anyway, unless we are talking about breeder reactors, normal reactors have only 1% fissionable fuel left when the fuel is spent: so reprocessing makes not really that much sense.
Natural uranium is 99.3% non fissionable and 0.7% fissionable. To get reactor fuel you need something like 95% - 5% ... usually we go for 94% - 6%.
So if spent fuel has significantly more than 1% fissionable uranium, then it makes sense to reprocess because it is already higher enriched than natural uranium. And that is the only point in reprocessing. If you reprocess you need to get all the high radioactive stuff out of it.
Bottom line it makes much more sense to just store the spent fuel instead of dividing it up into 40% unused uranium, enriching the remaining 50% uranium to a 94% - 6% ratio again and getting rid of the actinides. (Keep in mind, for a ton of reprocessed Uranium, you need another 5 - 8 tones of "fresh uranium" so you can extract the U235 from the fresh and put it into the "reprocessed" one)
Waste processing only made sense when you wanted to have breeders and use the Plutonium for bombs ...
France is reprocessing. Ever been at La Hague? They have 8 reactors at La Hague if I remember correctly. More than half of them are used to run the reprocessing industry. Imagine that. They have like 70 reactors all over France and 8 to run the reprocessing site. One of the reasons why they use so much power at night, or have such a high base load.
Uranium is radioactive ...
And the radioactivity we talk about is not the Uranium but the decay products, and those are not fuel.
I really don't get why people are so dumb about how a nuclear reactor works.
You have Uranium, which is made from two isotopes: U238 and U235. The natural distribution is 99.3% U238. And the rest is U235. In ordinary reactors you can not burn that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Canadian CANDU reactors can "burn" natural uranium, but I don't know how they do it, was never interested in figuring it.
Anyway, a standard reactor in the US burns Uranium that is enriched to about 6% Uranium 235. Let that sink into you. Where does that 6% come from? We are talking about changing the 99.3% versus 0.7% ratio into a 94% versus 6% ratio. Obviously to make 1 ton of 94/6 Uranium you need about 10 tons of natural uranium and you throw away 9 tons of it as waste. That is the fist kind of waste. But the US found an easy way to get rid of it, they use it as armament for their A10 bombers and spread it all over the middle east.
And yes, it is radioactive and highly poisones.
Anyway, now lets look at the reactor again. Now you fill that 94/6 uranium mix into a reactor. Only the 6% part, the Uranium 235, is actually used as fuel. When it is spent, it is spent. Depending on reactor design, you can burn it down to 1%, often only 3%. Lets assume, best case. You burned it don to 1%.
Now you have 94% Uranium 238, 5% decay products - the so called actinides - and 1% unspent fuel left.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The highly radioactive parts are the Actinides, not the Uranium. And Yes: only a fucking one single percent of fuel is left in the waste
And it is for fuck sake not really that complicated to read that up and get a damn clue.
Given past experiences with other countries the electricity prices will keep going up as a result of shutting down the nuclear power plants.
That is nonsense.
A) in Germany power prices changed because of taxes and other politics, as in feed in fees
B) in France electricity is heavy subsidized. If they would pay "market prices" their price would be 3 times higher.
It also is a lot more expensive in the winter than in the summer.
For house hold customers. Not for a power plant that has a 10 years fixed price contract, facepalm.
Also if they import natural gas from Russia, it will be piped through Germany, which means they'll get a cut from transport passing there.
They don't import any reasonable amounts of gas anyway. Your analysis makes no real sense. And the Russians are not idiots: business first. What do you care about the cut? If France exports electricity to Poland, "Germany" gets its cut, too!!
You can't run a steel smelter off intermittent power.
Of course you can. You simply run the smelter when the power is there.
You guys simply think that the power would be suddenly away, but it is not.
Great so what you are saying is France is converting over the energy mix Germany has ?
No, they go 100% renewable, probably a bit faster then Germany even.
hat gives them the most expensive power in Europe
No it does not. Power costs are actually only a very small fraction of our spendings. Because we use so less power. At some point you have to realize that most of the costs are taxes and grid costs. The grid cost does not shrink if you use less power, hence you have a perceived increase in power rates per kWh.
while they still burn brown coal because their heavy industries
Are you an idiot or what? How long does it take to build a 500MW simple power plant?
We can't replace coal plants faster than it takes to build replacements, moron.
And the same thing is true for France. How do you come to the stupid idea they would replace nukes with coal plants? I pointed already out: they are replacing them with renewables.
99% of solar cells don't contain either gallium or cadmium.
And that materials are not mined, they are by products of other mining activities.
The few solar cells that are based on gallium-arsenic are sent to space and used in satellites.
Well, they are recycled. Just not to make new tetra packs from them.
However you are right, those things should be forbidden.
Anyway, the parent was more one of those wackos who claims that melting iron/steel costs more energy than melting ore. Or similar for glass. There are so many people here who thing melting bottles costs the same energy as melting fresh glass from sand.
Then there's fusion power, which has virtually zero waste products. But that's still under research.
The current fusion reactors leave behind a huge pile of radioactive waste: the reactor.
Perhaps we might evolve to "neutron less" fusion reactors after we get the "simple ones" running, but except for space fare ... it makes no sense. Wind and Solar and Biomass and perhaps oil from algae is much much much cheaper.
Hell, the first steam engine wasn't invented until 300 years ago. ... the first steam engine was invented 2000 years ago. And with first in this case: "the oldest we now about". I would not wonder if someone invented it before that time repeatedly over again.
Just to nitpick
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
They did not know hat to do with it, so the only thing where it was used was "opening huge temple doors by magic".