The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
August 08, 2020, 10:42:42 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 08, 2020, 10:42:42 am

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium  (Read 14819 times)
Pyperlie
Adept Member
*****
*
Last Login:July 04, 2011, 09:45:31 pm
United States United States

Religion: Agnostic
Posts: 1802

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Topic Start: September 06, 2010, 06:16:06 pm »


Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium

Quote
If Barack Obama were to marshal America’s vast scientific and strategic resources behind a new Manhattan Project, he might reasonably hope to reinvent the global energy landscape and sketch an end to our dependence on fossil fuels within three to five years.

So, what do you guys think?  Is this overly optimistic, perhaps even naive?  Or is it a real possibility.  I'm terrible at physics, so I'd like to hear from people w/a better grounding in it than myself.

And if it is a real possibility, what can we do to make it happen?
Logged

~~~Pyperlie<^>

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

"Is no one inspired by our present picture of the universe? Our poets do not write about it; our artists do not try to portray this remarkable thing. The value of science remains unsung by singers: you are reduced to hearing not a song or poem, but an evening lecture about it. This is not yet a scientific age."
              -----Richard Feynman

I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night.
               ----Sarah Williams

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

sailor_tech
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:July 06, 2011, 04:43:27 pm
United States United States

Religion: Jewish
Posts: 3564

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #1: September 06, 2010, 07:22:42 pm »

Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium

So, what do you guys think?  Is this overly optimistic, perhaps even naive?  Or is it a real possibility.  I'm terrible at physics, so I'd like to hear from people w/a better grounding in it than myself.

And if it is a real possibility, what can we do to make it happen?

Start by Christianizing a lot of the enviromental movement from the 1980s and 1990s.

The problem is political, not technical, and to a lessor extent not economic. Nobody in the US wants anything with the word nuclear near them. Heck they don't want anything industrial near them.

I doubt the 5 year forcast, but 25 years maybe, depending upon how much money you want to spend tearing down suburban houses.
Logged
RandallS
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:June 23, 2020, 07:47:48 am
United States United States

Religion: Hellenic Pagan
TCN ID: ADMIN
Posts: 17181


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #2: September 06, 2010, 10:04:33 pm »

So, what do you guys think?  Is this overly optimistic, perhaps even naive?  Or is it a real possibility.  I'm terrible at physics, so I'd like to hear from people w/a better grounding in it than myself.

As far as I know, thorium is a theoretically better choice for fission reactors that uranium, but no money was for it in the early nuclear age as it did not produce any by-products useful for nuclear weapons (unlike uranium). Now it isn't used because the entire nuclear industry is tooled up for uranium.  Could we have thorium reactors producing commercial power in five years? Possibly, if the government funded it heavily and designed nuclear law and regulations to strongly encourage it and we were lucky. Ten years would be a better guess, but that's a long time for the government to pour lots of money into that isn't pork, defense, or an entitlement program.

However, getting the public to accept it would be even harder. The average person has this relatively insane fear of nuclear power plants -- that they might blow up like an atomic bomb. That's somewhat more likely than the sun rising in the west tomorrow, but I wouldn't bet any money on either happening.
Logged

Randall
RetroRoleplaying [Blog - Forum] -- Out Of Print & Out Of Style Tabletop Roleplaying Games
Software Gadgets Blog -- Interesting Software, Mostly Free
Cheap Web Hosting -- Find an Affordable Web Host
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #3: September 06, 2010, 10:13:37 pm »

However, getting the public to accept it would be even harder. The average person has this relatively insane fear of nuclear power plants -- that they might blow up like an atomic bomb. That's somewhat more likely than the sun rising in the west tomorrow, but I wouldn't bet any money on either happening.

I have to say that I am somewhat wary of nuclear power, but not because I'm afraid the plant will go ka-blooey.  I'm worried about what will happen to the waste.  We don't have a way to swiftly reduce it's toxicity and don't have a good way to store it in the type of quantities it would take to power this country.  In a lot of ways, it is still a better alternative to coal, but I don't feel too warm and fuzzy about it either.

Sperran
Logged
RoseRed
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 05, 2011, 03:26:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: pagan
Posts: 93


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #4: September 06, 2010, 11:21:29 pm »

I have to say that I am somewhat wary of nuclear power, but not because I'm afraid the plant will go ka-blooey.  I'm worried about what will happen to the waste.  We don't have a way to swiftly reduce it's toxicity and don't have a good way to store it in the type of quantities it would take to power this country.  In a lot of ways, it is still a better alternative to coal, but I don't feel too warm and fuzzy about it either.

Sperran

This is my main concern. Where would the waste go? Can we guarantee no damage? Regulation would have to be flawless and strict. And the strictness of regulation has a tendency to sway with changes of the political climate. And I'm not worried about a bunch of nuclear reactors going off. I'm worried about one tiny overlooked aspect, one mistake. An oil spill is a troubling matter. A problem with the city's nuclear plant-that's on another level.

Let's face it, no one wants to live near the power station. I think the payoff, in terms of damage to the atmosphere, would be better, but the risk might be higher. But I realize the chance of something going wrong is low. If their were a way to take care of the waste, I'd say it's worth the risk and a better option, maybe the lesser of two evils. I don't consider it "renewable". I think it's trading one harmful source for another. In a few decades our children could be talking about weaning off of nuclear, because of issues with the waste. Oh, gosh! Why can't we just embrace solar power! (Now who's naive? The sun is free, after the sale of the solar panels, who makes money? I suppose that's why the power companies aren't scrambling to get us solar panels Wink) But I can dream....
Logged
sailor_tech
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:July 06, 2011, 04:43:27 pm
United States United States

Religion: Jewish
Posts: 3564

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #5: September 06, 2010, 11:34:11 pm »

Why can't we just embrace solar power! (Now who's naive? The sun is free, after the sale of the solar panels, who makes money? I suppose that's why the power companies aren't scrambling to get us solar panels Wink) But I can dream....

Energy density. There isn't enough watts per sq meter coming from the sun.

Logged
RandallS
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:June 23, 2020, 07:47:48 am
United States United States

Religion: Hellenic Pagan
TCN ID: ADMIN
Posts: 17181


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #6: September 07, 2010, 08:04:22 am »

I have to say that I am somewhat wary of nuclear power, but not because I'm afraid the plant will go ka-blooey.  I'm worried about what will happen to the waste. 

Waste is far less of a problem with a thorium reactor. It just does not generate much that can't be used for something. Thorium reactors wouldn't has the problems with water cooling that uranium reactors do. Etc. They aren't perfect, but they would have far less waste and be far less dangerous than uranium reactors (which really aren't that dangerous providing you don't try to save money with shoddy construction, poor maintenance, and/or safety shortcuts).
Logged

Randall
RetroRoleplaying [Blog - Forum] -- Out Of Print & Out Of Style Tabletop Roleplaying Games
Software Gadgets Blog -- Interesting Software, Mostly Free
Cheap Web Hosting -- Find an Affordable Web Host
Darkhawk
Chief Mux Wizard
Staff
Adept Member
***
*
Last Login:January 20, 2020, 08:24:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Feri Discordian
Posts: 2485

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #7: September 07, 2010, 09:22:55 am »

This is my main concern. Where would the waste go? Can we guarantee no damage?

Um.

Coal plants.  Oil plants.  We don't "guarantee no damage" for those smoke sources.

Hydroelectric.  Ask the acres of displaced wildlife and drowned plants how well we guarantee no damage with those suckers.

Why do nuclear reactors have wildly more stringent requirements all of a sudden?
Logged

Ellen M.
Adept Member
*****
*
Last Login:February 17, 2013, 08:34:24 pm
United States United States

Religion: ADF - UU - eclectic Wiccan - devotee of Brighid
Posts: 2479

Go, then - there are other worlds than these.

Blog entries (0)

Ellen MacInnis lellenator
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8: September 07, 2010, 09:42:38 am »

Um.

Coal plants.  Oil plants.  We don't "guarantee no damage" for those smoke sources.

Hydroelectric.  Ask the acres of displaced wildlife and drowned plants how well we guarantee no damage with those suckers.

Why do nuclear reactors have wildly more stringent requirements all of a sudden?

Maybe it's got something to do with "Nuclear = total destruction of everything we know and love". The damage from nuclear plants is perceived to be far greater than from other types of power plants.
Logged

Sage and Starshine: My new Pagan blog about Druidry, witchcraft, Brighid, and everything in between. -- 14th post 6/1/11
sailor_tech
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:July 06, 2011, 04:43:27 pm
United States United States

Religion: Jewish
Posts: 3564

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #9: September 07, 2010, 11:55:56 am »

Maybe it's got something to do with "Nuclear = total destruction of everything we know and love". The damage from nuclear plants is perceived to be far greater than from other types of power plants.

Uh, not really. Screw ups can cause longer lasting damage and can effect more than just the workers in the plant, but not to the level of total desctruction. At least for the US designs. Chernoble was a purposeful disregard of basic safety procedures. One learns all sorts of things going to a school that trains steam plant engineers and had, at the time, a reactor on campus.



Logged
mandrina
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:August 13, 2013, 11:51:25 pm
United States United States

Religion: Reclaiming practice, still trying to identify diety, but have some ideas
Posts: 3546


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #10: September 07, 2010, 01:18:57 pm »

Uh, not really. Screw ups can cause longer lasting damage and can effect more than just the workers in the plant, but not to the level of total desctruction. At least for the US designs. Chernoble was a purposeful disregard of basic safety procedures. One learns all sorts of things going to a school that trains steam plant engineers and had, at the time, a reactor on campus.




note, she said percieved.  And perceived damage from an accident at a nuclear power plant is probably far higher than actual damage.
Logged

"I've got a bad feeling about this."

every good guy in any of the Star Wars movies.





[url=http://dragcave.net/vi
Ellen M.
Adept Member
*****
*
Last Login:February 17, 2013, 08:34:24 pm
United States United States

Religion: ADF - UU - eclectic Wiccan - devotee of Brighid
Posts: 2479

Go, then - there are other worlds than these.

Blog entries (0)

Ellen MacInnis lellenator
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11: September 07, 2010, 01:31:09 pm »

Uh, not really. Screw ups can cause longer lasting damage and can effect more than just the workers in the plant, but not to the level of total desctruction. At least for the US designs. Chernoble was a purposeful disregard of basic safety procedures. One learns all sorts of things going to a school that trains steam plant engineers and had, at the time, a reactor on campus.

I was talking about perceptions. Sorry if that wasn't obvious enough.
Logged

Sage and Starshine: My new Pagan blog about Druidry, witchcraft, Brighid, and everything in between. -- 14th post 6/1/11
RoseRed
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 05, 2011, 03:26:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: pagan
Posts: 93


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #12: September 07, 2010, 01:42:01 pm »

Um.

Coal plants.  Oil plants.  We don't "guarantee no damage" for those smoke sources.

Hydroelectric.  Ask the acres of displaced wildlife and drowned plants how well we guarantee no damage with those suckers.

Why do nuclear reactors have wildly more stringent requirements all of a sudden?

I didn't say nuclear power is the only resource that has problems dealing with it's waste. I'm no fancy big city environmentalist,  Wink but I know pollution comes from places other than nuclear power. I know there is no perfect solution.
Logged
Darkhawk
Chief Mux Wizard
Staff
Adept Member
***
*
Last Login:January 20, 2020, 08:24:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: Kemetic Feri Discordian
Posts: 2485

Blog entries (0)

WWW
« Reply #13: September 07, 2010, 01:54:49 pm »

I didn't say nuclear power is the only resource that has problems dealing with it's waste. I'm no fancy big city environmentalist,  Wink but I know pollution comes from places other than nuclear power. I know there is no perfect solution.

When why were you asking for perfect side-effects?

This is something that really, honestly, bugs me a lot, the idea that nuclear reactors have to go through extra hoops and have higher standards than other forms of power production, because, I don't know, they come with extra boogety-boo or something.  If radiation is ooky-spooky, shut down the coal plants.  They're worse.  (In addition to, y'know, smoke, carbon emissions, etc.)
Logged

RoseRed
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 05, 2011, 03:26:45 pm
United States United States

Religion: pagan
Posts: 93


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #14: September 07, 2010, 02:25:16 pm »

When why were you asking for perfect side-effects?

This is something that really, honestly, bugs me a lot, the idea that nuclear reactors have to go through extra hoops and have higher standards than other forms of power production, because, I don't know, they come with extra boogety-boo or something.  If radiation is ooky-spooky, shut down the coal plants.  They're worse.  (In addition to, y'know, smoke, carbon emissions, etc.)

I wasn't asking perfect side effects. I asked about the waste because nuclear plants produce nuclear waste, which can be dangerous. So can other forms of pollution, we know that, which is why we are looking for an alternative. Both coal and nuclear power have their benefits and drawbacks. I think nuclear power should have higher standards. The benefit to the environment is greater with nuclear power, but so is the risk. As for the waste, it's less volume, but higher danger. I think it's trading one evil for another. And on the tail end of an oil spill, I think higher standards will make people more comfortable. I don't think anyone is under the delusion that coal is great and has no problems, while nuclear power kicks puppies and makes babies cry.

I think we have it in our capacity to find a renewable solution, even if it simply is a supplement to conventional power. If there were a surefire way to make the waste innocuous, I'd say "The chances of anything going wrong, are really low--I think it could be worth it, let's try it until something even better comes along." As it stands, I think we are trading one problem for another.
Logged

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
5 Minutes to Kill (Yourself)
Humor and Quizzes
nigel 2 1750 Last post July 13, 2007, 10:16:52 am
by nigel
Tiny Dinosaur Fossil Is Found in China
Science and Technology
Pyperlie 7 2769 Last post February 21, 2008, 11:38:30 am
by Pyperlie
Ancient fossil find: This snake could eat a cow!
Science and Technology
Melamphoros 4 1914 Last post February 06, 2009, 09:04:45 pm
by WarHorse
T. rex for sale: Dinosaur fossil on block in Vegas
Science and Technology
Melamphoros 0 844 Last post September 05, 2009, 12:11:03 pm
by Melamphoros
Possible Safe Way to Store Nuclear Waste
Science and Technology
RandallS 8 2802 Last post June 23, 2010, 08:07:32 am
by Satsekhem
EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.06 seconds with 56 queries.