Jump to content

Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions.

Nuclear as religion sort of


 
283 replies to this topic

#261 Besoeker

Besoeker

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 945 posts 64 rep

Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:32 AM

View PostDustoffer, on 20 May 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

1.) Nissan Harvests Solar Power With World’s First Large-Scale Energy Storage System

Brandon Baker | May 13, 2014 4:39 pm | Comments


"Cars have long been Nissan’s primary business, but the company is looking for alternative uses for its electric vehicle (EV) batteries.
Along with Sumitomo Corp. and seven other companies, Nissan has unveiled 4R Energy, a joint venture using 16 lithium-ion batteries from EVs to store a solar farm’s power output help monitor energy fluctuations. The energy comes from Hikari-no-Mori, or “Forest of Light,” a solar farm with 36,000 solar panels on the man-made island of Yumeshima in western Japan’s city of Osaka."
http://ecowatch.com/...storage-system/  
  
2.)   Texas Tackles Electricity Storage
  • by Kate Galbraith

  • Nov. 7, 2010
Posted Image
Enlarge photo by: Kate Galbraith
"Dozens of gray compartments, lined neatly in rows, inhabit a box-like concrete building on the edge of the impoverished border town of Presidio. The only sound, aside from occasional clanking, is the whirring of air-conditioners to keep the compartments cool.
This $25 million contraption is the largest battery system in the United States — locals have dubbed it “BOB,” for Big Ole Battery. It began operating earlier this year, and it is the latest mark of the state’s interest in a nascent but rapidly evolving industry: the storage of electricity."

http://www.texastrib...ricity-storage/

Of course there is the fact of thousands of homes and businesses with their own various battery systems of long use, like my house for 16 1/2 years.
3.)Another battery blueprint for alternative energy;
https://www.sciencen....6acee-93287133

Excerpt;
"A new battery that relies on cheap organic molecules could help stockpile energy from renewable sources such as solar and wind power for use on cloudy and breezeless days.

Scientists have grappled with ways to bank power from intermittent energy sources because municipal power grids demand a continuous flow.

The new battery relies on quinones, common chemicals found in many forms of life that help hold energy for later use, Harvard researchers report in the Jan. 9 Nature. Previous designs of similar batteries have used metal compounds, which can be expensive, rather than quinones.

The device is a type of flow battery, in which two separated liquids pass in and out of a cell with electrodes. A membrane in the middle of the cell prevents the two solutions from mixing but allows ions to travel between them. To charge the battery, electricity causes a quinone-carrying liquid to accept electrons from the current and protons from the other liquid, containing bromide. The liquids then flow out of the cell and into storage containers. To extract energy from the battery, the liquids pass back though the cell and undergo the reverse chemical reaction."
4.) Cheaper green energy storage solution invented by Calgary profs

[img]https://s2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/IG6s1HgWcK7zYFA5VpYiYw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9Zml0O2g9NDU-/http://l.yimg.com/os/153/2012/07/18/cbclogo-sm-sharp-175812-jpg_045904.jpg[/img]CBC – Fri, 29 Mar, 2013

https://ca.news.yaho...-181630427.html

I see no real storage problem for alternative non-emissions energy.  Great for areas with enough wind, solar, wave, tidal, and other hydro, but still needing a large battery bank.   Modular Gen IV is for everywhere else, even replacing diesels on big ships, along with sails, wind generators, and solar electric.
ANYTHING to lower total HGHGs, and ANYTHING that helps absorb HGHGs, is needed, all within a decade, installed and running!
https://www.youtube....h?v=qlTA3rnpgzU
YOWZA!!!
Excellent stuff!
We will get there.
We have some way to go.

As far as I can tell, BoB at 4MW is the only one that's quantified. And it's operational.
All good stuff.

And, at the risk of being lambasted again for sounding sounding negative, it really isn't a lot in utility terms.
For scale, the capacity of a couple of medium sized wind turbines is about that and there are some that exceed this as a single units.
A Texas solar plant mentioned above is 150MW capacity. And another of 290MW here or on the solar thread.

We seriously need storage at utility scale capacity.

#262 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:54 AM

Well, that is grid thinking for you.  Micro-grids on a large storage are fine.  Trying to get them to pump electricity through a large grid is too expensive in line maintenance, line loss, and amortized costs.  Even that electric roads idea is expensive and won't work in cloudy areas, plus requires a long grid.
It is a personal dislike of the grid for several reasons.   I hate the look of marching erector set robots carrying large numerous wires.
I think they are a waste of materials and labor, when you can be independent like us.   I think they are a security risk in that terrorists, overloads, lightning strikes, tornadoes, and small animals can all put out huge areas too dependent on grid electric.  A sign of weakness.
It isn't just me.  I would venture that most here hate the sight of the damn grid.  Along with crowded super highways, belching smokestacks, trashed places, and diesel fumes.

#263 Besoeker

Besoeker

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 945 posts 64 rep

Posted 20 May 2014 - 02:18 PM

View PostDustoffer, on 20 May 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

Well, that is grid thinking for you.  
Unless you have local sources on a sufficient scale to service users you will need a transmission system.
For example, how would you get the 11,000kW to the London water ring main?

#264 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 21 May 2014 - 03:21 PM

I understand, you live on an island, and view the grid there as a good thing.   That is why I said it was my own feelings about it.
It boggles the mind on why London needs 11MW just to pump their water.   So far beyond sustainable that crowds are just a way of life.
Even on a large island, the grid can actually be a bunch of independent micro-grids.  When you can only produce 15% of the fruit you need to be healthy, that is a state of dependence on carbon heavy transport .
Clearly the UK must also reduce population and emissions, and is in an area where tidal and wave energy is not enough for more than coastal communities.  So it is ideal for modular Gen IV and ships driven by sails again.
Britannia Rules the Waves!

#265 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 21 May 2014 - 05:02 PM

View PostDustoffer, on 21 May 2014 - 03:21 PM, said:

So it is ideal for modular Gen IV and ships driven by sails again.
How much does Gen IV Cost?

#266 still learning

still learning

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 886 posts 162 rep

Posted 21 May 2014 - 05:33 PM

View PostDustoffer, on 21 May 2014 - 03:21 PM, said:

......It boggles the mind on why London needs 11MW just to pump their water......  
     And then there's the California State Water Project:  Pumping capacity 2600 megawatts according to http://www.panc.org/...orres_Sep11.pdf  (about 1/3 through the linked pages).  Won't use all that capacity all the time, and the pumping capacity isn' exactly the same as the electrical load, but still....(SWP does generate a lot of electricity with dams)  Then too, there's all the other agencies in California that move water around....

#267 Besoeker

Besoeker

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 945 posts 64 rep

Posted 21 May 2014 - 10:18 PM

View PostDustoffer, on 21 May 2014 - 03:21 PM, said:

I understand, you live on an island, and view the grid there as a good thing.   That is why I said it was my own feelings about it.
It boggles the mind on why London needs 11MW just to pump their water.  
Then be boggled further. That is just for the ring main which is part of the distribution system. Fifteen pumping stations. There is much, much more to it than just that. Extraction, treatment, and distribution account for 100 treatment works and nearly 300 treatment works.
And a couple of thousand or so further treatment works for the sewerage side of things.

London isn't unique. It's all part of the infrastructure any large city requires.The "gardez l'eau" sewage disposal method went out of fashion probably a couple of hundred years ago. Maybe more. I don't know for sure - even I wasn't around then... :biggrin:

Slightly more seriously, I'm trying to convey a sense of scale. I could have equally made the point about a 30MW cement works, paper mill, or a 100MW arc furnace in a steel mill. You need scale in order to understand the nature and magnitude of the issues and come up with viable solutions. With hard numbers.

#268 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 22 May 2014 - 11:19 AM

View Posteds, on 21 May 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

How much does Gen IV Cost?
  Here is one for three Gen IVs;
"
The European Commission in 2010 launched the European Sustainable Nuclear Industrial Initiative (ESNII), which will support three Generation IV fast reactor reactor projects as part of the EU’s plan to promote low-carbon energy technologies. Other initiatives supporting biomass, wind, solar, electricity grids and carbon sequestration are in parallel. ESNII will take forward: the Astrid sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) proposed by France, The Allegro gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR) supported by central and eastern Europe, and the Myrrha lead- cooled fast reactor (LFR) technology pilot proposed by Belgium.
The aim of ESNII is to demonstrate Gen IV reactor technologies that can close the nuclear fuel cycle, provide long-term waste management solutions, and expand the applications of nuclear fission beyond electricity production to hydrogen production, industrial heat and desalination. ESNII is designed to combine European capabilities in fast neutron reactor R&D with industrial capability to build the prototypes and develop supporting infrastructure.
The total estimated cost to ESNII of deploying these Gen IV prototypes past 2020 is EUR 10.8 billion: EUR 5 billion for Astrid, EUR 1.96 billion is for Myrrha, a technology pilot and a later LFR demonstrator, and EUR 1.2 billion for Allegro. Supporting infrastructure is projected to cost EUR 2.65 billion. The 2010-12 ESNII budget is EUR 527 million, including EUR 329 million for Astrid."
http://www.world-nuc...clear-Reactors/
Lots of money, in a poor world.   I am grateful to be in the sunbelt.  I am already seeing more cloudiness than 17 yea'rs ago.
The problem is a lot more than money, it is time.  At some point the fossil fuels have to be shut off, or allow the very long term ruin of the biosphere.  It is also possible we are already 'pissing into the wind'  (Am. archaic).

#269 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 22 May 2014 - 04:14 PM

Here is the latest Gen IV roadmap (Jan 2014 PDF)

There are 3 things that bother me about this paper:
1) Time: The Technology Roadmap defines and plans the necessary R&D to achieve
. . .  the deployment of Generation IV energy systems after 2030.
2) Money: Their source of funding seems to have really been hit hard in 2011 by Fukushima.
3) Safety:  Fukushima also brought to light, many questions about safety and reliability.

Hansen see's them being able to turn out a lot of cheap cookie-cutter Gen IV's to save the world.

How?

Attached Files


#270 Besoeker

Besoeker

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 945 posts 64 rep

Posted 23 May 2014 - 10:39 PM

Fukushima continues to be the bête noire thrown at the nuclear industry.
Sadly, the 20,000 fatalities from the tsunami and unrelated to the nuclear incident (with zero fatalities) seems to be the forgotten tale.

#271 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 24 May 2014 - 07:58 AM

Getting over the anti-ANY nuclear from Gens 1,2, & 3, is tough.  The large amount of money needed, and the time of after 2030 makes them of small use to reduce emissions enough in time.  Hansen was relating in his book what he knew from friends and personally about the very good Gen IV plans destroyed at Billy C's orders in '94.  His book was written in 2009 when there was 5 more years of time we no longer have, and he was mighty optimistic that it could be done to replace all coal and fossil fuel for power generation and large ship propulsion, before the time of the Arctic Positive Feedback Loop completion.
One thing I have not forgotten about Fukishima is the radiation in the north Pacific Ocean hitting the shores of the USA in Alaska down to CA.  Along with mercury fallout from Chinese coal power, I won't eat anything from that ocean.
Anyway, the Gen IV non-emissions dream is too far off to reduce emissions 90% by 2023 to have a hope of stopping thermageddon.
They SHOULD have been put on line in 1994!!!  We would have had 30 years to replace the HGHG emitting FFPPs, no we only have 9 years, if we are lucky.  Turning off the coal and other fossil fueled power, and leaving people without power seems to be the only way out.  A lot of people have to die when the power gets turned off.  If the power is not shut off, it guarantees the worst future possible.

#272 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 14 July 2014 - 09:02 AM

I found this in my bookmarks;
"Impact Partners, in association with Vulcan Productions and CNN Films, present PANDORA’S PROMISE, the groundbreaking new film by Academy-Award®-nominated director Robert Stone. The atomic bomb and meltdowns like Fukushima have made nuclear power synonymous with global disaster. But what if we’ve got nuclear power wrong? An audience favorite at the Sundance Film Festival, PANDORA’S PROMISE asks whether the one technology we fear most could save our planet from a climate catastrophe, while providing the energy needed to lift billions of people in the developing world out of poverty. In his controversial new film, Stone tells the intensely personal stories of environmentalists and energy experts who have undergone a radical conversion from being fiercely anti to strongly pro-nuclear energy, risking their careers and reputations in the process. Stone exposes this controversy within the environmental movement head-on with stories of defection by heavy weights including Stewart Brand, Richard Rhodes, Gwyneth Cravens, Mark Lynas and Michael Shellenberger. Undaunted and fearlessly independent, PANDORA’S PROMISE is a landmark work that is forever changing the conversation about the myths and science behind this deeply emotional and polarizing issue."
http://pandoraspromise.com/#/synopsis

#273 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 14 July 2014 - 09:41 AM

View PostDustoffer, on 14 July 2014 - 09:02 AM, said:

The atomic bomb and meltdowns like Fukushima have made nuclear power synonymous with global disaster.
Let me think.  
. . . How many ways, can we make renewable energy,
. . . . . . explode.
. . . . . . destroy human lives, and
. . . . . . produce toxic waste, that can kill future generations, yet unborn.

Attached Files


#274 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 14 July 2014 - 10:09 AM

View PostDustoffer, on 14 July 2014 - 09:02 AM, said:

>>>" But what if we’ve got nuclear power wrong? An audience favorite at the Sundance Film Festival, PANDORA’S PROMISE asks whether the one technology we fear most could save our planet from a climate catastrophe, tells the intensely personal stories of environmentalists and energy experts who have undergone a radical conversion from being fiercely anti to strongly pro-nuclear energy, risking their careers and reputations in the process. Stone exposes this controversy"
Gen IV to GET RID of all previous nuclear waste---a cleanup!  For 500 years of power followed by use of sea water.  However, it is very costly in a world going poorer with each added child.  It also can not be built enough in time to prevent Arctic meltdown and catastrophe, all because of that anti-ANY-nuclear idiocy in 1994, and since. ........

#275 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 14 July 2014 - 11:45 AM

View PostDustoffer, on 14 July 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Gen IV to GET RID of all previous nuclear waste---a cleanup!
Spend Billions of dollars, to build a Gen IV, (that could turn into another Fukushima)
. . . to get rid of the nuclear waste created by Gen 1, 2, and 3, and
. . . (you already know, won't solve the climate problem)
or spend the money on renewable energy?

Attached Files


#276 Shortpoet-GTD

Shortpoet-GTD

    Shifted

  • Validating
  • 8,025 posts 758 rep

Posted 16 July 2014 - 04:01 AM

We can go back and forth on the nuclear energy issue til the cows come home-
truth is; unless private investors want to take the risk and build new plants; nuclear power is dead in the water.

We don't have the money.
Congress won't even pony up enough funds for our aging infrastructure; bridges, dams, roads, water/sewage
pipelines; let alone building new nuclear plants.

The heritage foundation, a right wing conservative group said that the highway fund should go broke
and the responsibility should be on the states i.e. pass the buck and or kick the can down the road.
http://www.nytimes.c...-fund.html?_r=0
Why would funding for nuclear be any different?
So let's call it moot, and move on.

#277 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 16 July 2014 - 01:23 PM

Storage of Radioactive Spent Fuel Rods Still Haunts Nuclear Industry

Climate News Network | July 15, 2014 8:55 am | Comments

Long-term employment is hard to find these days, but one career that can be guaranteed to last a lifetime is dealing with nuclear waste.
http://ecowatch.com/...0dae0f-85901709

It would have been nice to be getting rid of this stuff in a safe, non-proliferating, non-emissions 1994 design Gen IV and get clean power while cleaning the waste that is so expensive to watch over.
Oh, well, move on, too dam late now!!!  Overpopulation and corruption have sucked the money, and the denialists and anti-any-nuclear idiots ruined it.  The dream of recovery of James Hansen is just too late, and now it is "blow Yellowstone", or kill the biosphere forever.  Oh, well, let's move on.  To the next world, and don't be late.  My amps and guitars are calling me.

#278 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 16 July 2014 - 07:49 PM

We seem to have some Nuclear Waste.
. . . That has a lifespan of millions of years.
. . . . . . No one in the Whole World, seems to be able to fix it.
. . . . . . . . . It's a Radioactive Gift, that keeps on giving.
. . . . . . . . . . . . But we will solve everything with a new type Nuclear Plant.

Attached Files


#279 Besoeker

Besoeker

    Activist

  • Veteran Shifter
  • 945 posts 64 rep

Posted 16 July 2014 - 10:19 PM

View Posteds, on 16 July 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

We seem to have some Nuclear Waste.
. . . That has a lifespan of millions of years.
. . . . . . No one in the Whole World, seems to be able to fix it.
. . . . . . . . . It's a Radioactive Gift, that keeps on giving.
. . . . . . . . . . . . But we will solve everything with a new type Nuclear Plant.

A related link...

http://www.world-nuc...ste-Management/

#280 eds

eds

    Shifted

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,981 posts 263 rep

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:09 AM

View PostBesoeker, on 16 July 2014 - 10:19 PM, said:

From your link:
  • Nuclear power is the only large-scale energy-producing technology which takes full responsibility for all its wastes and fully costs this into the product.  
  • The amount of radioactive wastes is very small relative to wastes produced by fossil fuel electricity generation.
  • Used nuclear fuel may be treated as a resource or simply as a waste.
  • Nuclear wastes are neither particularly hazardous nor hard to manage relative to other toxic industrial wastes.
  • Safe methods for the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste are technically proven; the international consensus is that this should be geological disposal.
If you Truly believe . . . All of the above . . . GO live in Fukushima prefecture,
. . . severely devastated by an 8.9 magnitude earthquake and
. . . a subsequent tsunami in March 2011, and
. . . still only, relative, simply, toxic industrial wastes . . . technically.
The disaster resulted in over 19,000 of deaths, according to the World Nuclear Association, and
. . . led to a meltdown of 3 nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant,
. . . the worst nuclear catastrophe since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

The post-tsunami cleanup is expected to take decades and
. . . to cost more than $50 billion.

Just don't be surprised, when you can't find Jim Hansen at Fukushima
. . . Nuclear Proponents are never around when its time:
. . . . . . to clean up the mess, or
. . . . . . pay for the damages.

Attached Files



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users