Page 4 of 7 [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

31 May 2012, 6:08 am

Quote:
Sumitomo developed a battery using a salt that is molten at 57 °C (135 °F) far lower than sodium based batteries. The battery offers energy densities as high as 290 Wh/L. The battery employs only nonflammable materials and will not ignite on contact with air, nor is there thermal runaway. This eliminates waste-heat storage or fire- and explosion-proof equipment, and allows closer packing of cells. The company expects that the battery requires half the volume of lithium-ion batteries and one quarter that of sodium-sulfur batteries.[13]


seems liquid salt is becoming more and more feasible, the ZEBRA battery (not the one described above) is already installd in cars but that battery required 2-3 days to melt if it ever solidifies and it operates at several hundred degrees.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

31 May 2012, 9:14 am

Kjas wrote:
TM wrote:
Green energy is the future, however in the present green energy is overly expensive, less effective and quite frankly an eyesore for the most part. Nuclear power is the most sensible way to ween humanity off fossil fuels. There are plenty of mountains that can be built within where the plant going boom (which is extremely unlikely based on statistics, google is your friend.) and it produces quite a bit of energy at a low level of waste.

Solar plants in the middle of the desert, wind turbines at sea or large tundra areas makes sense, solar and wind fields in agricultural land in a world with a food shortage is like selling your TV to buy a DVD player.


Economically speaking and in the current situation you are probably correct.

However, when it comes to risks, I would take a couple of exploding wind turbines over a nuclear reactor meltdown any day of the week.


I think most people would, however the fear of nuclear reactors melting down is a lot like fear of flying. Nobody is denying that reactors blow up and planes crash, however statistically you are more likely to electrocute yourself with a sex toy in the middle of Times Square than die on a plane or in a nuclear meltdown. With increased use of nuclear power, you'd also get more research and thus better and safer plants.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

31 May 2012, 9:32 am

Oodain wrote:
Quote:
Sumitomo developed a battery using a salt that is molten at 57 °C (135 °F) far lower than sodium based batteries. The battery offers energy densities as high as 290 Wh/L. The battery employs only nonflammable materials and will not ignite on contact with air, nor is there thermal runaway. This eliminates waste-heat storage or fire- and explosion-proof equipment, and allows closer packing of cells. The company expects that the battery requires half the volume of lithium-ion batteries and one quarter that of sodium-sulfur batteries.[13]


seems liquid salt is becoming more and more feasible, the ZEBRA battery (not the one described above) is already installd in cars but that battery required 2-3 days to melt if it ever solidifies and it operates at several hundred degrees.


Corrosion and growing hairs is still a problem

ruveyn



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

31 May 2012, 10:39 am

even in the antimony magnesium based ones running at 57 degrees celcius?

as far as i gather the reactance problems would be far greater in "pure" sodium reactors running at upwards of a 1000 degrees celcius.

as for growing hairs, will read up on it as i truth be told hadnt heard about the problem till now.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

31 May 2012, 10:44 am

Oodain wrote:
as for growing hairs, will read up on it as i truth be told hadnt heard about the problem till now.
It's just crystallization.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

31 May 2012, 11:01 am

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Oodain wrote:
as for growing hairs, will read up on it as i truth be told hadnt heard about the problem till now.
It's just crystallization.


ah


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Kjas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,059
Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore

31 May 2012, 9:22 pm

TM wrote:
I think most people would, however the fear of nuclear reactors melting down is a lot like fear of flying. Nobody is denying that reactors blow up and planes crash, however statistically you are more likely to electrocute yourself with a sex toy in the middle of Times Square than die on a plane or in a nuclear meltdown. With increased use of nuclear power, you'd also get more research and thus better and safer plants.


It's not fear, just risk management.

When something like that happens there are dire environmental and social repercussions for decades to come.

While better and safer plants would probably happen, as it is, most plants which have had meltdowns, have been in that position due to cutbacks in funding, laying people off, bad safety procedures and bad upkeep of the plant itself.

It's the margin for human error like we have already seen which causes me concern.


_________________
Diagnostic Tools and Resources for Women with AS: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt211004.html


John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

01 Jun 2012, 12:22 am

Vigilans wrote:
That is probably of less likelihood than someone sabotaging and detonating the contents of a nuclear reactor, especially since "getting through security" means hacking through secure networks that would not be part of the "internet"

The power plants would still have to talk to each other somehow to manage the power grid. Also making a reactor blow would require a team of physicists and engineers to reshape some fuel rods and attach specially made wires and explosives to it. In short, that would require a fission device inside the thing, as well as technicians that know how to turn a wrench in the core and a few weeks minimum to do it. Reactors are more stable than that without substantial modification, so Chernobyl-like disasters are as bad as it gets.

Vigilans wrote:
When it comes down to it, most sources of power can be weaponized if one wishes it so. Liquid Petroleum Gas tankers or Liquid Natural Gas tankers if detonated could present an explosion of kiloton proportions

Those things do blow from time to time, but not how you describe. The fuel would have to be mixed with an oxidizer to make it explode more than burn fast.

Quote:
Nobody is denying that reactors blow up and planes crash, however statistically you are more likely to electrocute yourself with a sex toy in the middle of Times Square than die on a plane or in a nuclear meltdown.

:lmao:
If sommeone ever did that, not only would they cinch the Darwin award for that year, but they'd earn themselves a place in the history books! :lol:


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

01 Jun 2012, 12:25 am

Senath wrote:
Oh God. Can you imagine if they installed one of those things and there was somehow an error with the wireless power transmission coordinates? :lol: We'd be lasered!

Or more likely, people in rural areas would try to get non-game birds to fly though it like a bug zapper from space. :twisted:


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

01 Jun 2012, 6:50 am

John_Browning wrote:
The power plants would still have to talk to each other somehow to manage the power grid. Also making a reactor blow would require a team of physicists and engineers to reshape some fuel rods and attach specially made wires and explosives to it. In short, that would require a fission device inside the thing, as well as technicians that know how to turn a wrench in the core and a few weeks minimum to do it. Reactors are more stable than that without substantial modification, so Chernobyl-like disasters are as bad as it gets.


I was thinking more along the lines of a release of radioactive isotopes through a hydrogen explosion or something along those lines. Fission of a nuclear reactor is way beyond most terrorists, for now at least.


John_Browning wrote:
Those things do blow from time to time, but not how you describe. The fuel would have to be mixed with an oxidizer to make it explode more than burn fast.


That is because nobody has yet blown a tanker (we're talking a huge amount of the stuff) in an act of terrorism. Opening the fuel tanks to the atmosphere and blowing some conventional explosives might be enough. Even if the blast were not completely devastating, oxygen would be consumed for a large radius, possibly suffocating thousands


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

01 Jun 2012, 8:29 am

Vigilans wrote:
That is because nobody has yet blown a tanker (we're talking a huge amount of the stuff) in an act of terrorism.
SSSHHHHHHH! They might hear you, damn it.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Jun 2012, 8:43 am

Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.

ruveyn



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

01 Jun 2012, 12:59 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
That is because nobody has yet blown a tanker (we're talking a huge amount of the stuff) in an act of terrorism.
SSSHHHHHHH! They might hear you, damn it.


Oops, I should have thought of that. I must have a nefarious mind to think of these things :P

Even coal could be targeted; not necessarily the power plants, but coal mines. A coal mine fire can burn for hundreds of years, make large areas unstable and prone to bursts of toxic superheated gases.

ruveyn wrote:
Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.

ruveyn


If this is directed at my "hydrogen explosion" description, I just want to clarify, I was not referring to hydrogen bomb thermonuclear weapons, but an explosion of pressurized gas within a nuclear reactor that releases isotopes over a large area, and with enough force, perhaps even the rods held within could be thrown hundreds of meters (such as what happened at Chernobyl)


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

01 Jun 2012, 1:14 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.

ruveyn


But they do have nuclear wepons well at least Faux news thinks they do.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Jun 2012, 5:57 pm

Joker wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.

ruveyn


But they do have nuclear wepons well at least Faux news thinks they do.


Possibly. Or low yield dirty bombs which can render a portion of a city unihabitable for 10 or 20 years. Look at Chernobyl. Nothing went critical their, but the place is unlivable for humans. Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha very likely have the makings for dirty radiological bombs.

ruveyn



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

01 Jun 2012, 6:32 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Joker wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
are not going to get a hold of an h-bomb any time soon.

ruveyn


But they do have nuclear wepons well at least Faux news thinks they do.


Possibly. Or low yield dirty bombs which can render a portion of a city unihabitable for 10 or 20 years. Look at Chernobyl. Nothing went critical their, but the place is unlivable for humans. Abdul, Ibrihim, Faisil, Achmed, Faraq and Mustapha very likely have the makings for dirty radiological bombs.

ruveyn


There are actually a fair amount of squatters living in the Chernobyl area, and in Pripyat. I have also read that the wildlife in the area, due to little human activity, is flourishing, at least in comparison to the pre-accident environment


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do