 PopCap
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 229 Posts
|
Sunday, February 26, 2012 2:00:15 AM
Not to mention the phenomenal amount of resources required to keep turbines maintained properly. Look at any wind farm and notice the number of burned out aviation warning beacons. If it's hard to change a light bulb, how much harder is changing out lubricants, brushes, or worn moving parts? |
|
 Heliosphere
Male, 30-39, Australia
6 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 9:54:37 PM
Mogulman;
"HAHAHAHAHA I love how they try to imply that three wind turbines can replace a nuclear plant. Some people can be so stupid. Average nuclear plant produces 800MW, average wind turbine produces 1.5 MW. You would need about 533 turbines to replace one nuclear plant."
It's even worse than that, wind turbines only produce that 1.5 MW for around 30% of the time, so you would actually need more like 1600 wind turbines to produce the same amount of power over the course of a year as the nuclear plant.
But of course a lot of the time those wind turbines would be producing no power or minimal power and would need to be backed up by less environmentally friendly sources like gas or coal. Unfortunately not many environmentalists understand important power generation concepts like capacity factor, dispatchability and spinning reserve. |
|
 jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 5:58:16 PM
randomxnp, that's idiotic, radioactive decay doesn't necessarily reduce mass, gamma rays have no mass and they are extremely dangerous. Also technological development invalidates the point that radioactive waste is dangerous and not simple to handle? The fact that it's something that's possible to handle with relative safety doesn't mean it's safe.
codydaniel. Yeah a small hill of radioactive waste is more accurate to what I meant |
|
randomxnp
Male, 30-39, Europe
769 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 3:03:14 PM
Jendrian
Sorry, but that is idiotic. The reason thorium waste has a long half-life is that it radiates very little. It is safe. You are also ignoring technological development, totally invalidating all you say. |
|
 Penguinato23
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
295 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 1:40:44 PM
Yeah, a hear some people hating on nuclear power...and yet the only thing I ever hear that's allegedly bad about it is that it produces nasty waste, which also allegedly doesn't cause a problem if disposed of properly.
From what I understand it sounds like proponents of nuclear power are right; people seem to just hear the word 'nuclear' and get all paranoid because they think of nuclear bombs and radiation and cancer and scary mutants from movies and whatnot.
I don't know, maybe I am misunderstanding. Maybe there is something actually wrong with nuclear power. It's just that if there is maybe people who disagree with it should bring whatever it is up more often rather than basically saying "nuclear power is bad, m'kay?" much of the time.
Of course sometimes encouragement of unbased paranoia, like in cases like this, is the hallmark of some special interest group with money and an ulterior motive, so there's always reason to be skeptical... |
|
 dm2754
Male, 30-39, Western US
2762 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 8:13:36 AM
funny to bad that wind power doesn't as good a nuclear power |
|
 Mogulman
Male, 18-29, Western US
300 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 7:58:42 AM
HAHAHAHAHA I love how they try to imply that three wind turbines can replace a nuclear plant. Some people can be so stupid. Average nuclear plant produces 800MW, average wind turbine produces 1.5 MW. You would need about 533 turbines to replace one nuclear plant.
The notion that nuclear power needs to be fazed out in favor of wind is absolutely ludicrous. People have an irrational fear of nuclear power that is preventing our progression off of carbon fuel. |
|
 codydaniel
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
21 Posts
|
Friday, February 24, 2012 2:32:14 AM
@jendrian
Check your sig figs, 2.1e6 m^3 is only 210m X 105m X 100m, for example. A small hill, or football field's worth, but certainly no mountain. |
|
 airsofter1
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1089 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 9:31:50 PM
yes nuclear power is far less efficient than drating windmills. i don't want to live on this planet anymore. |
|
 a103276
Male, 18-29, Europe
176 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 8:54:30 PM
It was hilarious until I realized there's a message to it. |
|
 madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
6406 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 6:19:54 PM
So what they're representing is that four windmills is the equivalent of all the power generated at that last four tower site?
----------
I don't think that was the message. |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:44:02 PM
@randomxnp. Oh right, many thousands of years. How much of the same radioactive material will we have produce in say, 10 thousand years, (twice more of the current age of the egyptian civilization, keep that in mind), when we finally run out of places to put it? how much of the same radioactive material that we produced 10 thousand years ago will still be there? well with a mean life of ~4.4 billion years for thorium waste, my guess is just about everything will still be there, radioactively decaying.
If we don't make it that long, it'll probably be because of a strong reliance on nuclear power.
I'm not advocating for the complete banning of it, I'm advocating for moderation |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:39:37 PM
@Arcval: Tiny? ...the first two pages of this article clearly show how at the beginning of 1998 it went from 320 cm (cubic meters) to 5600, twenty times more in a year, and although the projection is better (only 14500 cm) by the end of 2035, it's still a massive amount of highly radioactive material. Let alone the low-level radioactive material which grew to 2.1 million cm.
Tiny? That's a whole mountain right there and that's just in Canada. |
|
 RoboPatton
Male, 30-39, Western US
1947 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:37:46 PM
the should do a new one where animated house values crash after the windmills go up right in front of their ocean view. |
|
DJL
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
135 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:24:27 PM
So what they're representing is that four windmills is the equivalent of all the power generated at that last four tower site? |
|
randomxnp
Male, 30-39, Europe
769 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:24:25 PM
Jendrian
Thorium power waste is very quickly safe. Don't post until you know what you are talking about!
"How many years until we run out of containers and places to bury them?"
A lot. Like many thousands. Like, let's hope the species makes it that long, and then we can assume we'll have a better solution. Do you actually know how big the Earth is? |
|
randomxnp
Male, 30-39, Europe
769 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:21:59 PM
This advert was paid for by taxes and energy surcharges I can't afford. Hope they go out of business soon. If they can't make money they should go bust, not take subsidies. |
|
 Arcval
Male, 18-29, Europe
304 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:19:56 PM
@jendrian
The volumes of waste produced by nuclear power now are tiny as a volume, and a combination of newer plants can get it down to 13% of what it currently is. We will run out of fuel 1000000's of years before we run out of space. |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:06:12 PM
@Sathon: Congrats! good luck with becoming an experimental scientist! (no sarcasm, I really do like experimental physics) |
|
 Sathon
Male, 18-29, Canada
247 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 4:04:35 PM
Sick, I'm doing my undergrad in Engineering Physics at Queen's University in Ontario. |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:59:07 PM
@Sathon: University of British Columbia, I'm in Vancouver  , theoretical physics major. |
|
Sathon
Male, 18-29, Canada
247 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:58:03 PM
I'm assuming you're in grad school right now with grades like that, which school in Canada do you go to? |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:43:58 PM
before anyone says anything, there's no sensitive information other than my name in either of those documents |
|
jendrian
Male, 18-29, Canada
2352 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:42:53 PM
@Sathon: My kardex and title
where's yours? |
|
Sathon
Male, 18-29, Canada
247 Posts
|
Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:33:50 PM
@jendrian: "I'm a physicist."
Hmm..
>Age: 18-29
>Profile picture looks like an 18 year old.
You're as much of a physicist as I am. |
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}