Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: This guy

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    41,684

    Default

    NET ZERO WORLD!!!!






  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    39,726

    Default

    bet you still couldnt kill a black duck (to pbiz)
    Last edited by 2thDoc; 02-15-2021 at 05:13 PM.
    Ugh. Stupid people piss me off.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,580

    Default

    I reserved a rental car the other day and for $1.25 extra a day I could offset my carbon emissions. The company would donate my money to some organization to help reduce carbon emissions.

    Uh no, not happening
    Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Highstrung View Post
    I like fishing topwater. Will one of you jot down some of this redneck ghetto slang and the definitions for those of us who weren't born with a plastic spoon in our mouths?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Clarendon County
    Posts
    4,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PBiz View Post
    I aint a poacher..


    But, I would get Charles Beatty, 14 8balls of blow and all the bullets I had just to poach Bill Gates's ranchero..
    Eye guards....

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    917

    Default

    Bill Gates says the US 'should move to 100% synthetic beef'
    https://mol.im/a/9267327

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    19,819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beech View Post
    Bill Gates says the US 'should move to 100% synthetic beef'
    https://mol.im/a/9267327
    .

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Catdaddy; 02-16-2021 at 09:20 PM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Bowman
    Posts
    5,997

    Default

    Fuck Bill Gates
    cut\'em

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FROG LEVEL
    Posts
    20,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southernduck View Post
    Fuck Bill Gates
    X2
    Gettin old is for pussies! AND MY NEW TRUE people say like Capt. Tom >>>>>>>>>/
    "Wow, often imitated but never duplicated. No one can do it like the master. My hat is off to you DRDUCK!"

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    41,684

    Default

    Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to build new kind of nuclear reactor in Wyoming
    The project in Wyoming – the country’s top coal-producing state – is a small advanced reactor with salt-based storage that could boost output

    Warren Buffett’s Pacific Corp and Bill Gates’s TerraPower have joined forces on a plan to launch an advanced Natrium nuclear reactor in Wyoming..

    Reuters
    Wed 2 Jun 2021 22.20 EDT

    Power companies run by billionaire friends Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have chosen Wyoming to launch the first Natrium nuclear reactor project on the site of a retiring coal plant.

    TerraPower, founded by Gates about 15 years ago, and power company PacifiCorp, owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, said on Wednesday that the exact site of the Natrium reactor demonstration plant was expected to be announced by the end of the year.

    Small advanced reactors, which run on different fuels to traditional reactors, are regarded by some as a critical carbon-free technology than can supplement intermittent power sources like wind and solar as states strive to cut emissions that cause climate change. [See footnote]

    “We think Natrium will be a game-changer for the energy industry,” Gates told a media conference to launch the project in Cheyenne, Wyoming.

    “This is our fastest and clearest course to becoming carbon negative,” Wyoming’s governor, Mark Gordon, said. “Nuclear power is clearly a part of my all-of-the-above strategy for energy” in Wyoming, the country’s top coal-producing state.

    The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system’s power output to 500MW during peak power demand. TerraPower said last year that the plants would cost about $1bn.

    Late last year the US energy department awarded TerraPower $80m in initial funding to demonstrate Natrium technology, and the department has committed additional funding in coming years subject to congressional appropriations.

    Chris Levesque, TerraPower’s president and chief executive, said the demonstration plant would take about seven years to build.

    “We need this kind of clean energy on the grid in the 2030s,” he told reporters.

    Nuclear power experts have warned that advanced reactors could have higher risks than conventional ones. Fuel for many advanced reactors would have to be enriched at a much higher rate than conventional fuel, meaning the fuel supply chain could be an attractive target for militants looking to create a crude nuclear weapon, a recent report said.

    Levesque said that the plants would reduce proliferation risks because they reduce overall nuclear waste.

    This footnote was added on 4 June 2021 regarding fuel used by the reactor. According to an Associated Press story on 2 June about the Natrium project, the advanced modular reactor involved (AMR) will – like most traditional reactors – use uranium. A Guardian query on the fuel point has been sent to Reuters; further clarification may follow..

    "You never act your age, in spirit, outlook, humor or perspective. But you do show the wisdom and sensibility that only 200 years' of extraordinary reporting can bring. One can only imagine what you will continue to grow into!" – Mary Garton, US

    With your help, we will continue to provide high-impact reporting that can counter misinformation and offer an authoritative, trustworthy source of news for everyone. With no shareholders or billionaire owner, we set our own agenda and provide journalism that’s free from commercial and political influence. When it’s never mattered more, we can investigate and challenge without fear or favour.

    Unlike many others, we have maintained our choice: to keep Guardian journalism open for all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay. We do this because we believe in information equality, where everyone deserves to read accurate news and thoughtful analysis. Greater numbers of people are staying well-informed on world events, and being inspired to take meaningful action.

    We aim to offer readers a comprehensive, international perspective on critical events shaping our world – from the Black Lives Matter movement, to the new American administration, Brexit, and the world's slow emergence from a global pandemic. We are committed to upholding our reputation for urgent, powerful reporting on the climate emergency, and made the decision to reject advertising from fossil fuel companies, divest from the oil and gas industries, and set a course to achieve net zero emissions by 2030.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...yoming-natrium

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Fort Kickass
    Posts
    47,000

    Default

    California should have had that earthquake that was supposed to send it into the Pacific before everybody migrated out of there.
    "Rivers and the inhabitants of the watery elements are for wise men to contemplate and for fools to pass by without consideration" -Izaak Walton

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Summerville
    Posts
    13,416

    Default

    I wonder if Fluor is going to build this for them. I know they are working on a bunch of little package type nuclear reactors

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    41,684

    Default

    Better late than never...

    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post
    Why in fuck are we not building molten salt reactors instead of these old ass bullshit reactors Westinghouse was pushing?
    Quote Originally Posted by Trail'nTree View Post
    To be honest, in theory these are a lot more efficient, but since they are breeder reactors the by products can used in weapons grade applications, which presents a security issue. The biggest concern however is they produce fast neutrons and do not have shielding affect from water like in a light water reactor, which causes a high rate of neutron embrittlement to core and other primary components. I went to a SMR (small modular reactor) conference two years ago in Canada, and there are several companies that are trying to perfect this technology. You realize this is technology is from the 50's and there is a reason why it is not being used. I do think the only cost effective way nuclear hangs around is the SMR's unless natural gas beings to go up in price, or maybe after the Korean Reactors in UAE or the Westinghouse reactors in China come online, large base unit plants will be more cost effective to build.
    Quote Originally Posted by JABIII View Post
    I do, and I believe that it is more political and stubbornness than science. I, of course, defer to your hands on knowledge and am jealous that I was not at that conference. MSR's were proven, at Oak Ridge if I remember correctly. We seriously need to have a program today, working on them. As far as by products and weapons grade material, we have more of it stored at SRS than the Soviet Union produced in their entire history, which pretty much makes South Carolina one of the most powerful countries on the planet, next time we decide to secede...
    Mass-produced floating nuclear reactors use super-safe molten salt fuel

    By Loz Blain
    June 15, 2021


    Even in the worst-case scenario of a terrorist bombing, molten salt nuclear fuel simply hardens into rock, vastly reducing the consequences of an accident while making these next-gen reactors cheap, effective and small enough to put on floating barges



    Copenhagen startup Seaborg Technologies has raised an eight-figure sum of Euros to start building a fascinating new type of cheap, portable, flexible and super-safe nuclear reactor. The size of a shipping container, these Compact Molten Salt Reactors will be rapidly mass-manufactured in their thousands, then placed on floating barges to be deployed worldwide – on timelines that will smash paradigms in the energy industry.

    Like other molten salt reactors, which have been around since the 1950s, they're designed to minimize the consequences of accidents, with a pair of very neat passive safety measures the company claims can greatly change the safety equation at the heart of any nuclear power investment.

    Firstly, they use nuclear fuel that's mixed into fluoride salts. The combination is liquid above 500 °C (932 °F), allowing it to flow through the reactor, which operates at near-atmospheric pressures. This liquid salt functions as a coolant for the nuclear fuel, replacing the high-pressure water cooling in older reactor designs. But if this fuel is exposed to air, instead of venting explosively as steam, it acts like lava and solidifies into rock.

    Yes, the rock is radioactive, and you shouldn't go have a picnic on it, but it's not a cloud of radioactive gas that can blow across the continent; it's solid rock that can be cleaned up by safety teams with Geiger counters. It also has very low solubility in water, so it's comparatively safe even if it falls into the sea.



    The Seaborg molten salt reactor design is incredibly compact, and features multiple passive safety featuresSeaborg Technologies
    Secondly, if temperature starts getting out of control for some reason, a "frozen salt" plug at the bottom of the reactor is the first thing that'll melt, and this will immediately drain the reactor core into a series of cooled drainage tanks underneath.

    This pair of simple measures, says Seaborg Technologies co-founder and CEO Troels Schönefeldt, radically re-focuses the nuclear safety question away from total accident prevention with four layers of redundancy at every point of failure, to much simpler consequence mitigation, and it'll have a huge impact on the cost of nuclear power.

    "We take a different approach," he told Radio Spectrum in an interview. "We’re not reducing the likelihood of an accident to zero, there will be accidents. We should avoid them as much as we can, but there will be accidents. Hopefully, there will be a lot of accidents because we will have a lot of these reactors. What we do, instead of reducing the likelihood, is reduce the consequence of even the worst disasters. Or even acts of war where you actually bomb the reactor. The consequence there is that this fluoride salt will flow out of the reactor, or explode out of the reactor, and lie on the field. It’ll solidify. And now you shouldn’t go onto that field. You should actually keep 10 or 20 feet of distance. But you can go there with a Geiger counter and clean it up. It’s wildly expensive, but you can do it. And that changes the fundamental safety profile of the technology. And in doing so, we change the cost, which again, in turn changes the business model."

    The reactors themselves will be built in Denmark, then sent to shipyards in South Korea to be installed on floating barges and moved to their final locationsSeaborg Technologies

    But perhaps the most impactful change to the business model is Seaborg's proposal to install these reactors on barges, and float them offshore rather than buying up land to develop nuclear power plants. There are several advantages here. For starters, you can manufacture them in bulk at a single facility. Seaborg is looking at Korean shipyards, which are already closely and efficiently connected to supply chains with enormous production capacity.

    "If you want us to build not one reactor to start with, but a thousand, we could start by building a thousand," Schönefeldt told Radio Spectrum. "That will take, like, three or four years on these shipyards. So it’s basically unroofed in how fast you can scale it."

    These barges can be moved just about anywhere on the planet, either moored offshore or on large or small rivers, depending on how big a reactor it is. There's virtually no site preparation required; it's fully self-contained and very easy to connect to a power grid. Seaborg estimates it can service 95 percent of the world's population this way, putting basically no land requirements on a baseload or load-following power station up to a healthy 600 MW, which could supply nearly 100,000 homes.

    Each shipping container-sized module generates up to 200 MW, and mounting them on floating barges could make these power plants incredibly quick to manufacture and deploy around the globe
    Each shipping container-sized module generates up to 200 MW, and mounting them on floating barges could make these power plants incredibly quick to manufacture and deploy around the globeSeaborg Technologies

    The challenge here, as with all molten salt reactors, is corrosion. Hot molten salt itself is highly corrosive, and this will be a serious challenge to design around for every component that comes into contact with the fuel salt. Float the reactors on barges in salty seawater, and you expose the entire exterior to a powerful corrosive agent as well; cargo ships are typically designed with a 25-year service life in mind thanks to the effects of life in salt water.

    And it doesn't stop there for Seaborg. Other molten salt reactors use graphite as a moderator, slowing down the neutrons produced by each fission reaction to maintain the chain reaction. But graphite tends to fracture and weaken when exposed to intense radiation with repeated heating and cooling, eventually resulting in what Seaborg co-founder and CTO Eirik Eide Pettersen describes to Thomas Thor Associates as "unacceptable hotspots."

    Seaborg's solution is to use another molten salt – sodium hydroxide – as a liquid moderator. Thus, the core design places the fuel salt tube inside a larger tube filled with sodium hydroxide, creating a first-of-its-kind all-liquid reactor that's remarkably compact. But sodium hydroxide itself is a powerfully caustic base, often used as oven cleaner or drain cleaner; the Seaborg design has to deal with this added corrosive agent too.

    And on top of all that, there's the freaky phenomenon of "grain-boundary corrosion" to boot, caused by the presence of tellurium as a fission by-product in the fuel salt stream. Tellurium atoms can merrily penetrate through metals, and swap positions with other elements, leading to embrittlement of the metals at their weakest points.

    The company is well aware of its key challenges here. "Seaborg’s core IP is based on corrosion control in the moderator salt, and applying the lessons learned since the 1950s," says Pettersen. "But it is not just a question of corrosion, it is also how easy it is to put these things together. Hands-on experience is important. They need to be welded, tested, inspected, maintained. We are working towards having perhaps 20 or 30 test loops in Copenhagen, with the experiments designed, set up and executed. The conceptual design is already done; we are now working on the basic design and in that way we are working up towards a full-scale prototype."

    Seaborg has engaged regulatory bodies in the nuclear industry very early on, with a view to mass manufacture and global rollout on a very rapid time scale
    Seaborg has engaged regulatory bodies in the nuclear industry very early on, with a view to mass manufacture and global rollout on a very rapid time scaleSeaborg Technologies

    That full-scale prototype is currently scheduled to go online in 2025, at which point it'll likely be sent to work off an island in Southeast Asia. Having raised some reasonably substantial capital, Seaborg is hiring like mad to work toward that goal. It hopes to achieve regulatory type approval for its design by 2026, and commercial serial production could follow as early as 2027.

    These timelines are "almost insane" in the energy market, Schönefeldt told the Switch 2020 audience in a presentation earlier this year, and a validation of the mass production strategy and floating barge approaches. Energy industry investors, who are used to dealing with extremely long planning and construction phases, as well as multi-decade return on investment periods, can now put their money into something that's online incredibly rapidly and paying for itself within 6-10 years.

    The Seaborg reactor is small enough to fit in a shipping container, making it remarkably easy to move around even for ground installations. It'll run for around 12 years without refueling. Its fuel cannot be used in nuclear weapons. It's capable of being run on refined, recycled nuclear waste from older reactors – although there will be some regulatory hurdles there, says Schönefeldt. You can draw heat straight from the reactor even more efficiently than drawing electricity, so it'll be useful in ways other than just being a power station.

    Next-generation advanced nuclear power is a hot topic at the moment. With global resolve hardening around the target of zero carbon emissions by 2050, coal- and gas-fired power stations are rapidly being retired. Renewable resources like solar and wind energy will provide the bulk of the energy we'll need moving forward, but nuclear offers a reliable, cheap and green way to bolster the base load and fill in gaps when renewables aren't generating.

    Despite some extremely high-profile catastrophes, nuclear is already by far the safest method of power generation, with a "deathprint" 330 times lower than coal-fired electricity. The new generation of advanced nuclear reactors promises to be even safer, and molten salt designs like Seaborg's can dramatically lower the consequences of those vanishingly rare incidents as well. If this company can solve the corrosion issues as effectively as its investors believe it can, what an enormous game-changer this could be.

    https://newatlas.com/energy/seaborg-...reactor-barge/

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Edisto/Camdenshire
    Posts
    7,433

    Default

    Damn. How far back did you have to go to quote Gert?
    Quote Originally Posted by walt4dun View Post
    Monsters... Be damned if I'd ever be taken alive by the likes of faggot musslims.
    Quote Originally Posted by 2thDoc View Post
    I am an equal opportunity hater.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •