This response is for outside observers rather than to continue to argue as I have no expectation of convincing you of anything.
I don't believe the coolant systems broke until after the hydrogen explosions. The Atlantic article cites anonymous sources making these claims, which I just don't find credible since they fly in the face of many other sources of information. I am assuming you think there is some conspiracy by the nuclear industry to hide the broken pipes. The other article you posted is about a pump that failed 5 years after the tsunami. Also, convenient that now the switch gear was destroyed by the earthquake too.
Why don't I believe what you propose:
1) Units 5 and 6 survived because the generator and switch gear were protected from flooding. The building and coolant system designs were the same and they did not meltdown.
2) The double ended shear failure is considered not credible in the industry. You may not be proposing this exact failure mechanism, but as a result of this paradigm in the industry in service inspections (ISI) plays a big role. In service inspection plans are implemented on safety class pipe to monitor thickness and cracking, which regularly use UT to verify the condition of pipes. These activities are covered by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) boiler and pressure vessel code (BPVC) Section XI.
3) If this accident were simply due to pipe failures, it would be better for the nuclear industry. That is an easier problem to deal with than the issues that have been brought to light due to this accident and the ones before it (people and management failures).
4) These systems are very robust. I base this off my experience with them. That is not a great reason to convince anyone else but it factors into my opinion.
You reveal that you don't understand the technical details you are trying to argue by invoking "military grade". Nice that you included helicopters in the story to make it sound impressive. The term you should have used if you wanted to sound like you know what you are talking about is Safety Class. That is a nuclear term and means something in the industry, but not really relevant for generators in this case. "Military grade" doesn't mean magical.
There are reasons to question the merits of nuclear power, just not the ones you are making.
The distribution system that would allow external power connection was destroyed by the tsunami. Discussed where citation 8 is used here https://carnegieendowment.org/...
See, he comes from a time when the expectation here was that people did more than 1) read the title, 2) read the summary, 3) RTFA. All of which seem to be optional these days.
Try again. All the operating reactors shut down safely after the earthquake. In fact the emergency generators for unit 6 survived the tsunami and kept both unit 5 and 6 from melting down. Suggest you see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
You don’t seem to understand what happened at Fukushima. The reactors where fine, it was the emergency generators that were destroyed which are required for decay heat cooling that caused the whole accident. On a ship based reactor, these would be inside and protected or not necessary with a natural circulation design (this is also possible on a land based design like AP1000).
How is it tax free? Dont know where you live, but in the US profits from trading currencies are still taxable. If it is in a tax free account then the fact that it is crypo is irrelevant. If not in the US I am curriuous town know the differences in how investments are taxed.
Havenâ(TM)t you noticed many people on here believe anything Elon says. He said on the call today they were still going to make money this year so it must be true.
Iâ(TM)m not saying Tesla cant make it as acompany but they have some challenges. The difference between ford and tesla is ford had $156B in revenue in 2017 and $7.6B in net income (see https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...) while tesla had $12B in revenue and -$2B net income (see https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...) and their cash burn appears to be accelerating. Just comparing debt load between the two is not apples to apples.
Normal high speed trains (CRH) in China travel at 300 kph. The maglev train from Shanghai to Pudong International travels at ~430 kph. I have been on both types at these speed (they conveniently put the current speed in every car). The maglev does always travel this fast, ostensibly due to energy demand during peak usage (couple of times I was on it we only broke 300 kph). The shanghai maglev is about 30km long.
Hyper loop needs to be much faster to impress me given the existing in-service trains.
Given that the third mass needs to be negligible for the Lagrange points to work (at least according to Wikipedia), to me it seems like this situation might be more like a strange type moon rather than a planet. What is or isn't a "planet" is just a random definition so there isn't really a right answer.
The individuals that make up the working groups are PhDs from a number of universities around the world. The co-chair of working group I is a guy from China (you would think they have a reason not to want global warming). You also seem to be missing the difference between what is happening and what the solution is. The wealth transfer to poor countries doesn't have to be the solution to the fact that global warming is real.
And I wonder how many of the people making claims on here are actually climatologists. I am not and since I don't think there is a giant conspiracy of climatologists, I take my cues about global warming from the IPCC (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml). Even though I am not a climatologist, I can read, and the IPCC 4th assessment report agrees with you.
The more interesting part of this development is the possibility to make receivers on your printer. For example, the only federally controlled part on an AR-15 is the lower receiver. Every other part can be bought with no paper work (e.g., barrels, triggers, upper receivers, stocks, optics,...). There are already production models that use polymers. Factories that do this type of stuff require an FFL (federal firearms license) for manufacture of weapons. If you can do it in your house all the rules are out the door (legally you are also supposed to have the FFL, but...). You can make the receivers and buy the rest of the parts with cash for a fully untraceable gun. Another interesting point is that there are only very small difference between fully automatic versions and semi-automatic versions of the AR-15, if you can make the receiver at your house you could make a full auto version.
I am not saying the estimates are wrong, but I take these types of estimates with a grain of salt. People have been warning about the end of oil for decades and saying peak oil is not far off. The problem is that these predictions are inherently based on proven reserves. In oil, as the demand increases (and hence the price and profit), companies start looking harder for more. In oil they historically keep finding it. The same may not be true for Uranium, but there is a decent chance there is more uranium out there than people think.
All that being said, I am a big fan of breeder reactors. Thorium Breeder reactors are NOT experimental and have been used in commercial pressurized water reactors (LWBR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shippingport_Atomic_Power_Station and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor) that put electricity on the grid (about 60MWe). Non-throium breeders have also been run that are liquid sodium fast reactors (EBRII http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBRII) which produced 20MWe. You may be confusion these technologies with liquid flouride throrium reactors (LFTR).
Not quite in line with the data. FTFA "Kaplan said 100 percent of subjects who scored below 50 percent on the test have gone to receive an Alzheimer's diagnosis within six years, while none of those who scored above 67 have developed Alzheimer's." This doesn't equate to 100% accuracy. What happens between 50 and 67%? Plus it doesn't say what the sample size is. Is it 1, 10, 100, 1000? Some more robust statistics would have been nice. They were probably trying to keep it simple instead of confusing people with 99/99, but they could have said "approaching 100%".
I guess I could see how a certain world view might cause you to incorrectly say that about the second book (guns germs and steel), but you clearly have not read Collapse. Collapse talks at length about how many white and non-white civilizations/societies have collapsed, barely escaped, or are on the edge now.
A book called COLLAPSE by Jared Diamond goes into some good detail about the viking settlements and the conditions that allowed their society to survive and then collapse. The rest of the book discusses other societies that collapse and the reasons. Interesting read if you like the subject. His other book (Guns Germs and Steel) is also very good.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently we are just recycling stories that were posted a few days ago.
If they are priceless, don’t you have your answer?
This response is for outside observers rather than to continue to argue as I have no expectation of convincing you of anything.
I don't believe the coolant systems broke until after the hydrogen explosions. The Atlantic article cites anonymous sources making these claims, which I just don't find credible since they fly in the face of many other sources of information. I am assuming you think there is some conspiracy by the nuclear industry to hide the broken pipes. The other article you posted is about a pump that failed 5 years after the tsunami. Also, convenient that now the switch gear was destroyed by the earthquake too.
Why don't I believe what you propose:
1) Units 5 and 6 survived because the generator and switch gear were protected from flooding. The building and coolant system designs were the same and they did not meltdown.
2) The double ended shear failure is considered not credible in the industry. You may not be proposing this exact failure mechanism, but as a result of this paradigm in the industry in service inspections (ISI) plays a big role. In service inspection plans are implemented on safety class pipe to monitor thickness and cracking, which regularly use UT to verify the condition of pipes. These activities are covered by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) boiler and pressure vessel code (BPVC) Section XI.
3) If this accident were simply due to pipe failures, it would be better for the nuclear industry. That is an easier problem to deal with than the issues that have been brought to light due to this accident and the ones before it (people and management failures).
4) These systems are very robust. I base this off my experience with them. That is not a great reason to convince anyone else but it factors into my opinion.
You reveal that you don't understand the technical details you are trying to argue by invoking "military grade". Nice that you included helicopters in the story to make it sound impressive. The term you should have used if you wanted to sound like you know what you are talking about is Safety Class. That is a nuclear term and means something in the industry, but not really relevant for generators in this case. "Military grade" doesn't mean magical.
There are reasons to question the merits of nuclear power, just not the ones you are making.
The distribution system that would allow external power connection was destroyed by the tsunami. Discussed where citation 8 is used here https://carnegieendowment.org/...
See, he comes from a time when the expectation here was that people did more than 1) read the title, 2) read the summary, 3) RTFA. All of which seem to be optional these days.
Try again. All the operating reactors shut down safely after the earthquake. In fact the emergency generators for unit 6 survived the tsunami and kept both unit 5 and 6 from melting down. Suggest you see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
You don’t seem to understand what happened at Fukushima. The reactors where fine, it was the emergency generators that were destroyed which are required for decay heat cooling that caused the whole accident. On a ship based reactor, these would be inside and protected or not necessary with a natural circulation design (this is also possible on a land based design like AP1000).
Thats why I said before :). More than basded on, Naval Reactors (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Reactors) was very involved in shippingport.
I swear they changed the title while I was posting.
Yes, the US Navy hasbeen doing it since before commercial reactors existed.
How is it tax free? Dont know where you live, but in the US profits from trading currencies are still taxable. If it is in a tax free account then the fact that it is crypo is irrelevant. If not in the US I am curriuous town know the differences in how investments are taxed.
Havenâ(TM)t you noticed many people on here believe anything Elon says. He said on the call today they were still going to make money this year so it must be true.
Iâ(TM)m not saying Tesla cant make it as acompany but they have some challenges. The difference between ford and tesla is ford had $156B in revenue in 2017 and $7.6B in net income (see https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...) while tesla had $12B in revenue and -$2B net income (see https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...) and their cash burn appears to be accelerating. Just comparing debt load between the two is not apples to apples.
But they have a huge debt load and one report I saw said model 3 cancellations outnumber orders now. See here https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/...
Normal high speed trains (CRH) in China travel at 300 kph. The maglev train from Shanghai to Pudong International travels at ~430 kph. I have been on both types at these speed (they conveniently put the current speed in every car). The maglev does always travel this fast, ostensibly due to energy demand during peak usage (couple of times I was on it we only broke 300 kph). The shanghai maglev is about 30km long. Hyper loop needs to be much faster to impress me given the existing in-service trains.
Given that the third mass needs to be negligible for the Lagrange points to work (at least according to Wikipedia), to me it seems like this situation might be more like a strange type moon rather than a planet. What is or isn't a "planet" is just a random definition so there isn't really a right answer.
The individuals that make up the working groups are PhDs from a number of universities around the world. The co-chair of working group I is a guy from China (you would think they have a reason not to want global warming). You also seem to be missing the difference between what is happening and what the solution is. The wealth transfer to poor countries doesn't have to be the solution to the fact that global warming is real.
And I wonder how many of the people making claims on here are actually climatologists. I am not and since I don't think there is a giant conspiracy of climatologists, I take my cues about global warming from the IPCC (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml). Even though I am not a climatologist, I can read, and the IPCC 4th assessment report agrees with you.
He will go to jail before he gets sued, unless he possesses a Type 7 FFL. Making guns is illegal unless you have the proper licensees.
The more interesting part of this development is the possibility to make receivers on your printer. For example, the only federally controlled part on an AR-15 is the lower receiver. Every other part can be bought with no paper work (e.g., barrels, triggers, upper receivers, stocks, optics,...). There are already production models that use polymers. Factories that do this type of stuff require an FFL (federal firearms license) for manufacture of weapons. If you can do it in your house all the rules are out the door (legally you are also supposed to have the FFL, but...). You can make the receivers and buy the rest of the parts with cash for a fully untraceable gun. Another interesting point is that there are only very small difference between fully automatic versions and semi-automatic versions of the AR-15, if you can make the receiver at your house you could make a full auto version.
I am not saying the estimates are wrong, but I take these types of estimates with a grain of salt. People have been warning about the end of oil for decades and saying peak oil is not far off. The problem is that these predictions are inherently based on proven reserves. In oil, as the demand increases (and hence the price and profit), companies start looking harder for more. In oil they historically keep finding it. The same may not be true for Uranium, but there is a decent chance there is more uranium out there than people think. All that being said, I am a big fan of breeder reactors. Thorium Breeder reactors are NOT experimental and have been used in commercial pressurized water reactors (LWBR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shippingport_Atomic_Power_Station and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor) that put electricity on the grid (about 60MWe). Non-throium breeders have also been run that are liquid sodium fast reactors (EBRII http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBRII) which produced 20MWe. You may be confusion these technologies with liquid flouride throrium reactors (LFTR).
I wouldn't be surprised to see a bigger push towards e-books. That is a way around the "problem" for the publishers.
Not quite in line with the data. FTFA "Kaplan said 100 percent of subjects who scored below 50 percent on the test have gone to receive an Alzheimer's diagnosis within six years, while none of those who scored above 67 have developed Alzheimer's." This doesn't equate to 100% accuracy. What happens between 50 and 67%? Plus it doesn't say what the sample size is. Is it 1, 10, 100, 1000? Some more robust statistics would have been nice. They were probably trying to keep it simple instead of confusing people with 99/99, but they could have said "approaching 100%".
I guess I could see how a certain world view might cause you to incorrectly say that about the second book (guns germs and steel), but you clearly have not read Collapse. Collapse talks at length about how many white and non-white civilizations/societies have collapsed, barely escaped, or are on the edge now.
A book called COLLAPSE by Jared Diamond goes into some good detail about the viking settlements and the conditions that allowed their society to survive and then collapse. The rest of the book discusses other societies that collapse and the reasons. Interesting read if you like the subject. His other book (Guns Germs and Steel) is also very good.