Page 1 of 1
If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2022 11:56 pm
by Left Seater
Why is nuclear not being pushed by the global warming types.
Nuclear is by far the most efficient power we have. And it releases zero carbon into the atmosphere. Instead the global warming crowd continues to push wind and solar which bring up the rear. Further wind and solar generation require lots of mining to make them feasible.
So which is it? Is zero carbon the goal or just a talking point.
Discuss.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 12:23 am
by Wolfman
Good question. The entire issues smells. Saying carbon dioxide is pollution is like saying Amy Schneider is a female.
Coal burning is sold as old smoke belching technology, but it could produce a LOT of electricity. Natural gas too. If we had say only 100 years of oil, you think gasoline would still be $3.50 a gallon? I don't think so. These government edicts/plans all smell.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 12:31 am
by Mikey
Carbon free is good. Carbon free without toxic radioactive waste that lasts 10,000 years and we have no safe way to store it is even better.
Discuss.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:36 am
by smackaholic
The latest generation of reactor uses this "waste" as fuel. We've already got piles of it stored, why not use it?
Solar makes some sense. Mass storage is a technical, financial and ecological nightmare. Wind might make some sense in places as well. Nuke to power base load is the answer. And it doesn't have the environmental issues that wind has.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:47 am
by Mikey
smackaholic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:36 am
The latest generation of reactor uses this "waste" as fuel. We've already got piles of it stored, why not use it?
Which one is that? Are there any operating at a utility scale? I’d like to see one.
Or is this the nuclear industry’s equivalent of “clean coal?”
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:04 pm
by Left Seater
Mikey wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 12:31 am
Carbon free is good. Carbon free without toxic radioactive waste that lasts 10,000 years and we have no safe way to store it is even better.
Discuss.
Sure. No one disagrees with that general statement. But please show us a realistic plan for carbon zero that uses wind and solar as the main generator of power. You can start with southern CA.
The amount of mining and land that would be required for wind and solar generation as our main power generation is massive.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:09 pm
by Kierland
Hawaii has too much solar power today. So stop being an obtuse twat you fucking traytorr.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2022 1:03 am
by Wolfman
^^^^^^
Like photosynthesis does not exist. Must be as some think it's good to chop down a forest and replace it with a solar panel array.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:07 pm
by smackaholic
schmick wrote: ↑Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:16 am
If only this planet had something that turned all of that carbon in to oxygen
Somewhere, as we speak, forests like this are being cleared to put up solar farms.
These "farms" require regular maintenance to keep the forest from reclaiming its land. This is typically done by gas powered equipment, although I have read about using livestock to keep the areas clear. Never actually seen it, though. And I regularly drive past these "green" farces.
I am for putting them on roofs where it makes sense or better yet in parking lots where they provide the added benefit of car protection.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:17 pm
by smackaholic
Kierland wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:09 pm
Hawaii has too much solar power today. So stop being an obtuse twat you fucking traytorr.
First off, Hawaii has no heating needs and not much cooling needs. Most of the world does not have this benefit.
And do they have enough battery storage to get through the night? I doubt it. They do have plenty of mountains, so maybe they could build enough gravity storage to get it done, but they aren't doing that. They rather have millions of powerwalls hanging in every house. So what if we have to strip mine vast chunks of the planet to build them.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2022 1:43 pm
by Left Seater
smackaholic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:17 pm
Kierland wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 2:09 pm
Hawaii has too much solar power today. So stop being an obtuse twat you fucking traytorr.
First off, Hawaii has no heating needs and not much cooling needs. Most of the world does not have this benefit.
And do they have enough battery storage to get through the night? I doubt it. They do have plenty of mountains, so maybe they could build enough gravity storage to get it done, but they aren't doing that. They rather have millions of powerwalls hanging in every house. So what if we have to strip mine vast chunks of the planet to build them.
Smackaholic, you are assuming he knows what he is talking about.
Hawaii produces more solar power than is needed a few times each day. They are no where near providing all of their energy needs from solar. In fact during peak evening demand solar is not adding any power. So no Hawaii does not have too much solar, as it can’t supply all of their energy needs as it is. However you are correct in asking about storage. They have some but not nearly enough if the goal is too reduce carbon based power generation.
And to get to that sort of storage levels they will need a ton of resources from mining, which many are actively working to shut down.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2022 1:48 pm
by smackaholic
This is where these “green” fanatics lose me.
They point out how for a couple of hours a day in some places, they can make enough power to run the grid.
They call this “renewable”.
Do Li Ion batteries magically renew themselves?
No. They wear out and then you have the problem of disposing/recycling
Same goes for the monster bird killers. They have a service life of somewhere around 30 years. They what do you do?
I suspect the towers are probably good for longer, but not the blades.
And those things are very expensive and consume a lot of material to build and a fair bit to maintain.
There is a small wind farm in RI I pass by regularly. 7 of them. Only a few years old and usually at least one is down for maintenance. Or maybe it’s off because they are making too much power?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2022 10:21 pm
by Left Seater
The other thing the greenies don’t mention is wind turbines often draw power from the grid. When the wind is just reaching the minimum speed necessary to produce power electric motors kick in to help get the blades spinning. This takes a huge amount of power to overcome inertia. Also when the wind isn’t strong enough or too high to spin the blades the plants still pull power to run the plant.
Generally wind speeds below 12 mph and greater than 45 mph means no power is generated. Ice and snow can also cause shut downs.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2022 10:33 pm
by Kierland
smackaholic wrote: ↑Wed Feb 09, 2022 1:48 pm
This is where these “green” fanatics lose me.
They point out how for a couple of hours a day in some places, they can make enough power to run the grid.
They call this “renewable”.
Do Li Ion batteries magically renew themselves?
No. They wear out and then you have the problem of disposing/recycling
Same goes for the monster bird killers. They have a service life of somewhere around 30 years. They what do you do?
I suspect the towers are probably good for longer, but not the blades.
And those things are very expensive and consume a lot of material to build and a fair bit to maintain.
There is a small wind farm in RI I pass by regularly. 7 of them. Only a few years old and usually at least one is down for maintenance. Or maybe it’s off because they are making too much power?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You get lost when it gets hard, we already knew that about you. You have never even heard of gravity batteries apparently and everything is you can’t mine this or that. You somehow don’t get lost when you find out you are killing the planet. You call windmills bird killers but cars are not planets killers. Fuck off traytorr.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2022 2:57 am
by smackaholic
I have already mentioned gravity storage numerous times.
It is simple and relatively cheap. But that’s not what all the greenies want. They want one of Elon’s crazy expensive battery packs to hang on the wall.
Solar has its place for sure. So do the bird killers, maybe, in places like west Texas.
But it needs to happen without government $$$$.
And 4th Gen nuke is really where we need to spend any tax money. It can deliver us electricity “too cheap to meter” as was the promise back in the 50s before the anti nuke industry pushed costs through the roof.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2022 4:13 am
by Left Seater
The Feds could also put money behind energy storage. Find the new generation of batteries that don’t need all of these metals that require vast mining.
Our current storage technology isn’t going to get us to zero carbon with wind and solar.
Re: If carbon free power is the goal
Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 4:04 am
by smackaholic
Gravity storage is the answer. The only problem is it only works on a large scale which means people can't put them in their garage and get big subsidies for doing it.
If mikey and the rest of the greenie have the answer to these material issues, let's hear them.