legacycentral bbs

my uncle is an HVAC engineer, he's designed a few buildings that heat and cool with geothermal power. Actually the town building in my town is geothermal heated/cooled. The initial cost is pretty high, but ongoing costs are almost nill (small amount of electricity to power the system). In the long run it's pretty economically and environmentally sound. He did mention that you can't do it anywhere though. There is a limit to how deep the wells can be, at least with current technology. I'm sure that with time, even that will change.

yeah but my point was on a power planet pumping down and up hot water from the magma

Eventually, wouldn't there be an overuse causing the Earth's core to cool? I don't want Al Gore to get anymore bright ideas.

Al Gore's had bright ideas?

its been BILLIONS of years its aint getting any colder trust me
in fact
it got hotter... I think the core of the earth is a fusion reactor... hints why earth has such a big ass electromagnetic field.

Hmmmmm. Interesting theory about the emf.

I believe that heat taps, tidal generators, solar panels (etc, etc,) will become a major part of our energy production only when current methods out-cost the price of the alternatives. Necessity is the mother of invention. I also believe we should build more nuclear plants for our electricity needs now and in the future. Shoot the waste to the sun or bury it in Antarctica. Nobody's gonna complain in either place.

My brother in law is currently making a still to produce ethanol from his grass clippings. He's already experimented with a hydrogen reactor to heat his pool. I told him to sink a bunch of money into solar panels so the electric company can pay him for what he doesn't use and be done with it. My sister is not happy with his pricey endeavours and the fact that it has to be 92 outside for him to turn on the central air in their house. Some of us secretly wish he'd blow himself up when he gets his still running. He's building it out of copper so I can't steal it to make moonshine. He's quite a peculiar fellow, but I admire his efforts to screw the government and energy companies.

And Algore's come up with some real shiners. His newest is that "Inconcievable Bullshit" movie or whatever. Remember how he invented the "Internet"? I'm beginning to see similarities between him and Dr. Evil. Someone should tell him that the jet he flies around in uses more fuel than all of our Subarus combined by a longshot.

Richard wrote:I also believe we should build more nuclear plants for our electricity needs now and in the future.

Then why does this administration make it so damn hard to get nuclear powerplants...and why do they focus so much on building new oil powered ones? I don't get it.

did u know in the 1960's one golf ball size of uranium could produce the same amount of energy as 19 train cars of coal...they should build all the nuclear power plants at the south pool produce all the hydrogen there and ship it to the world.... not a bad idea. who wants to make a country no one has claim to it hehehehe. We can call it NuckLand

Opposition to nuclear energy has been from the terminally anxious and superstitious (the left),not,(rpt not), the administration

Fortunately, public opinion is beginning to by pass the old dogma

Nuclear power is really quite safe when properly designed, and maintained by people that don't fuck up.

The only byproduct is nuclear waste, which they've built a pretty bad ass containment site at yucca mtn.

I wouldn't really want that in my backyard, but I also want clean energy.

Legacy777 wrote:The only byproduct is nuclear waste, which they've built a pretty bad ass containment site at yucca mtn.

d00d. European plants produce no waste. Unfortunately, we as dumbass Americans put a moratorium on Nuclear Plants since TMI, so we use 30 year old tech in our power plants.

Then looks like we need to build new plants then.

Legacy777 wrote:Then looks like we need to build new plants then.

Tell that to this administration. They'll probably just ignore you like they do the nuclear regulatory commission.

Once again, apparently, American ignorance rules the day. I never heard about the newer nuclear plant design, but that makes sense as I never hear anything about how they deal with their waste, either. If the public were educated ... ah, forget it, what's the use? Apathy sets in when you're done banging your head against the wall.

At this point in time, all nuclear waste is stored on site in a containment building (which, by the way, can survive an airplane being crashed into it or several RPG's hitting it). So, a plant like TMI produces 8 lbs of waste a year. So, by the time its 30 year run is over (it's scheduled to be decommissioned in 2009), it will have produced ~240 lbs of waste. At the point in which decommission occurs, the waste will be transported to Yucca Mountain for storage. As far as I know, that's where the stuff will stay for the rest of eternity.

240 lbs of waste is really not a lot of waste considering how much energy was produced.

Legacy777 wrote:240 lbs of waste is really not a lot of waste considering how much energy was produced.

that's pretty much the ballance that nuclear energy offers. Dispite the fact that the waste is very dangerous and harmfull, the amount produced is rediculously low compaired to the engergy it yields. All in all I think it's a pretty viable technology. If there was a lot of concern about waste building up we could as someone else mentioned, hurl it into the sun. Even at the cost of a rocket program to do it, nuclear energy would likely still be more cost effective that oil or coal production. The worst thig about nuclear energy right now is the stigma attached to it.

sammydafish wrote: The worst thig about nuclear energy right now is the stigma attached to it.

That's exactly right.....nuclear energy is fine....it's the dumbasses operating it that are not. If we hire competent people to design, build, and operate nuclear facilities, they should be fine.

I agree that there's alot of stigma surrounding nuclear energy. You really can't place all the blame on left wing, radical environmentalists; all types of people are scared of what "might" happen (although the sierra club is one of the biggest groups against it).

It is foolish to think that a repeat of TMI would happen with all the technological improvements achieved in the last 30 years. Just look at cars as an example. 2005 had the most-ever autos on the road in the US and the FEWEST fatal accidents. And, as I recall, the safety systems at TMI shut down the reactor well before there could have been a problem. Chernobyl was a complete and utter fuckup. They did EVERYTHING wrong, and paid a price. The whole world learned from it. Going by today's standards, you're more at risk of being struck by lightning on a cloudless day than having a meltdown. Really. Japan has had some issues recently, but that's them. But even then, there was no meltdown.

Even if we had an administration that was totally, 100% pro-nuclear power, very few projects would ever come to the building stage. The political side of the game is quite tedious, the picking of suitable sites is frustrating, and the protesters and anti-nuke groups makes it almost not worth it. The rest of the world is flocking to nuclear power. I believe even Iran is doing a good thing by wanting nuclear power. They're rich in oil, but even they realize the nuclear is the way to go. However, I trust them about as far as I could throw a 1600 pound woman anchored to the floor uphill on a really hot day.

As it sits, with the threat of terrorism in everyone's minds, nobody wants a soft target within fallout range of where they live. A recent report found illegal immigrants working in a secure zone at a nuclear plant. I believe even that is a big no-no, but nonetheless, nothing happened, except for the workers getting hauled off. I do believe, however, that it is quite possible to build plants with proper safety and shutdown features, rigorous maintenance procedures, and impenetrable security features. The terrorists know that we know they'd like to hit a reactor, so they're not really likely to try something that risky.

The technology is there to make it safe. It's just a matter of getting the public on board and educated away from the stigma and getting politicians to exercise real leadership and get things done, no matter how many whiners there are. (If you haven't noticed, there is ALWAYS someone willing to stand in the way of something, no matter what it is.) I believe in telling them "Tough nuggets, you don't have to like what's going on, and that's your right, but don't assume you're gonna get you're way just because you have a sign and a lot of free time. Be pissed somewhere else, our future's at stake." Nobody's got the cajones nowadays to say that though. What a shame.

Richard wrote:They're rich in oil, but even they realize the nuclear is the way to go. However, I trust them about as far as I could throw a 1600 pound woman anchored to the floor uphill on a really hot day.

You trust them that much huh...

I figured I'd give them that benefit of a doubt lol