Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

No

9 (37.5%)

Yes

15 (62.5%)

Total Members Voted: 23

[Baffler]

I accidentally the link, it was supposed to be the second one. What's there now is what the scientific american article drew its figures, I'll edit it back in. here it is.

[wierd]

the figure I posted was correct for known sources. The figure you have is for hypothesized sources. Are we going to be the future of our entire species on guesses or known things?

Have you looked up at the predictions of "when will oil reserves run out"? They've been at the state of "known oil reserves will run out in about 30-60 years" for more than half a century now.

However, we hit "peak oil" quite some time ago. All "new" oil exploration is very costly to harvest, which means less and less efficiency in the overall system between getting it out of the ground, and pushing electricity to your home. As we move further down the decline of that slope, the greater that inefficiency will become, until it becomes completely non-viable to get oil out of the ground at all. At that point, biosynthetic fossil fuel will be more economical than oilfeild exploration!

The problem with nuclear, at least in regards to fast breeder reactors, is that we cant legally make them-- again, because of foolish moratoriums-- in this case, against the production of nuclear arsenals. The technology to produce lots of bombs is the same technology you need to keep lights on using less useful fission feedstocks-- fuel enrichment through breeder reactors. The nuclear nonproliferation treaty effectively makes the deployment of such reactors a no-no.  They are not on the menu.

Let it be a cautionary tale about why you should REAAAAAALY contemplate the consequences of widespread moratoriums against technologies.

[martinuzz]

Uranium depletion is a non issue if we start seriously using liquid salt thorium reactors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor

[Reelya]

I accidentally the link, it was supposed to be the second one. What's there now is what the scientific american article drew its figures, I'll edit it back in. here it is.

But that article is from fucking 1983! And is based on a proven non-viable sci-fi tech:

Like many aspects of nuclear power, fast breeder reactors have been subject to much controversy over the years. In 2010 the International Panel on Fissile Materials said "After six decades and the expenditure of the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars, the promise of breeder reactors remains largely unfulfilled and efforts to commercialize them have been steadily cut back in most countries"

Not refering to you per se Baffler, but if people are relying on faulty research from several decades ago, you kinda have to doubt they have anything relevant.

~~~

Uranium depletion is a non issue if we start seriously using liquid salt thorium reactors

Sure, I'll go with that. When is the first commercial one coming online?

[wierd]

Fast Neutron Reactors (aka, breeder) are pretty much restricted to research reactor deployments, because of nonproliferation treaties.

It is NOT that the technology is non-viable. It is because it is a political impossibility due to existing world treaties.

Kinda like how we cant loft a nuclear reactor to the moon to found a moon base. It is illegal to orbit that kind of payload.

Strange, for a non-viable technology, there sure are a lot of well-functioning research reactors in existence using it.

[Sergarr]

I've heard a lot of times around my university that we need to build breeder reactors, but I've never quite heard those "nonproliferation treaties" being mentioned in the context. I wonder why...

BN-1200    Commercial, pool, sodium    2900/1220    oxide, nitride    Russia    From mid-2020s

oh wait that's why

I guess we just don't give a fvck about those treaties any longer?

[wierd]

It could very well be US centric, but it is still the result of "ooh scary nuclear! Let's ban it!" in action.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RS22542.pdf

As a consequence, the US does NOT reprocess fuel. It is illegal to do so here.  I suppose that does not limit other countries from doing so, (and more power to them if they do!!) but for one of the biggest offenders in the climate change problem, breeder reactors powered by reprocessed reactor waste is a pipedream here.

[Sheb]

So, while reading stuff today, I came upon an article claiming that a Brexit would cause no ends of troubles for Northern Ireland, what if there suddenly is a need to erect trade barriers between Dublin and Belfast. I was wondering if that argument was being made in NI. Thedwarfyone?

[Loud Whispers]

Unless the EU goes full commie shitlord and abandons free trade there should be no problem; The ROI is inexorably linked with the rest of the isles in trade, the EU didn't do shit to facilitate bilateral trade that was already there - if the EU tried to erect trade barriers between the two they'd just be driving the ROI further away. ROI citizens currently get more legal benefits from the UK than the EU, more commerce from the UK than the EU and the ROI like the UK is not on the "oh god I can't stop destroying my borders" train that the continent is so fond of. Heck, the ROI's GDP is set to increase as a direct consequence of the UK economy currently doing so well. Hilariously whilst the UK's GDP has increased, immigration has meant that per capita the UK is poorer. I'm also reading some yurope papers saying that the increase of Euroskepticism in the isles can be traced back to when the EU banned the export of British beef in 1996; a blow in the EU's reputation that never recovered and was sustained by their continual fuck ups from Juncker to Greece to the Meditteranean and Balkans. I'm skeptical how true this is, but I am always fond of stories where the smallest of actions end up deciding the fate of nations.

[Vilanat]

So, whadayathink, Portugal can still be considered a democracy?

[Bouchart]

The Portuguese borrowed more than they could afford.  Now they will take orders from ex-Stasi agent Merkel.

[Sergarr]

So, whadayathink, Portugal can still be considered a democracy?

This article may be relevant here.

[Loud Whispers]

So, whadayathink, Portugal can still be considered a democracy?

If you're in the EU, you're nothing more than a province of a greater Empire. When Ireland rebuked the EU, they just held another referendum until they got the choice they wanted. When Greece wanted to get public spending back up they decided that Greece wanted more public cuts. Now Poortugal is demonstrating quite clearly why if you surrender your own currency to a foreign power you are under their control; your parliament has no teeth and cannot control anything.

[Sheb]

LOL.

[Baffler]

LOL.

How constructive.

It sure looks to me like Silva thinks he knows what his constituents want better than his constituents. He says outright that his goal is to avoid challenging Eurozone fiscal policy, as the article notes, in direct opposition to his own democratic mandate and against Portuguese political tradition.

If you see it differently then let's hear it.