Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-21-2013, 09:23 PM
anghrist's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lancaster, CA
Posts: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by jplinville View Post
...Until we have a the ability to safely store the waste somewhere, I don't see nuclear as being safe.
Just burn it...

Using a Fusion Fission Hybrid Reactor to Burn Nuclear Waste

__________________
2013 Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid SEL Premium (Sparky)
http://badges.fuelly.com/images/smallsig-us/193500.png


It's a car not a science experiment! Open the throttle!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-21-2013, 09:48 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
It matters not how clean coal can be made to burn. What matters is how much it cost to produce a BTU from it.

The answer currently is that coal is expensive when stacked up against natural gas.

The coal industry can whine all it wants about regulations and whatever, but there is not a power producer out there that cares one bit about their troubles. All they care about is producing power at the lowest cost, and even coal mining that is totally automated cannot compete with Natural Gas.

It's all about the $$$$$$$.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-21-2013, 10:49 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
As it should be, until we can agree on a better medium of exchange.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Phoenix Arizona. Ex Durban R.S.A.
Posts: 6,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by buffa98 View Post

TMI and Chernobyl were both human errors due to stupidity. Japan? One in a million shot. Cost per KW vs accidents nuc is a lot safer and cheaper.
I don't agree that Fukushima was a one in a million occurrence. It's what happens when you build a nuclear plant on a tsunami prone coastline on top of a fault zone and (apparently) place the backup generators below sea level. Not an indictment of Nuclear power itself at all actually but certainly of human and engineering stupidity.

- Peter.
__________________
2021 Chevrolet Spark
Formerly...
2000 GMC Sonoma
1981 240D 4spd stick. 347000 miles. Deceased Feb 14 2021
2002 Kia Rio. Worst crap on four wheels
1981 240D 4spd stick. 389000 miles.
1984 123 200
1979 116 280S
1972 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1971 108 280S
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:24 PM
davidmash's Avatar
Supercalifragilisticexpia
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 47,550
Don't forget San Onofre and Diablo plant located near fault lines in California. Indian point near Manhattan.
__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:26 PM
Diesel911's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach,CA
Posts: 51,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by spdrun View Post
Water electrolysis. Nuclear energy.
Ya, I thought the Hydrogen was supposed to come from Water. I was shocked when I read about the using Oil.
Apparently they get more Hydrogen cheaper from Oil.
__________________
84 300D, 82 Volvo 244Gl Diesel
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:36 PM
Diesel911's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach,CA
Posts: 51,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidmash View Post
Don't forget San Onofre and Diablo plant located near fault lines in California. Indian point near Manhattan.
The San Onofre Facility is right near to the Beach. Yet on the other side of the Highway from it the terrain starts rising. They could have built the Facility a 1/4 Mile inland and had it be at least 200 feet above Sea Level.
An off shore Earth Quake could cause a Tidal Way and swamp it.

If someone attacked the USA do you think the Nuclear Power Plants might be a target that would enhance the attack?
Especially if We had more of them.
__________________
84 300D, 82 Volvo 244Gl Diesel
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:57 PM
davidmash's Avatar
Supercalifragilisticexpia
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 47,550
If I am targeting something they would be on my short list. Take out a power source and create a dirty bomb of sorts in one fell swoop.
__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-22-2013, 12:15 AM
Fulcrum525's Avatar
Sing Blue Silver
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 2,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by pj67coll View Post
I don't agree that Fukushima was a one in a million occurrence. It's what happens when you build a nuclear plant on a tsunami prone coastline on top of a fault zone and (apparently) place the backup generators below sea level. Not an indictment of Nuclear power itself at all actually but certainly of human and engineering stupidity.

- Peter.


I have to agree on this one. I thought the same thing when I first read the report on the accident.
__________________
1982 300GD Carmine Red (DB3535) Cabriolet Parting Out
1990 300SEL Smoke Silver (Parting out)
1991 350SDL Blackberry Metallic (481)

"The thing is Bob, its not that I'm lazy...its that I just don't care."
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-22-2013, 11:11 AM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
It matters not how clean coal can be made to burn. What matters is how much it cost to produce a BTU from it.

The answer currently is that coal is expensive when stacked up against natural gas.

The coal industry can whine all it wants about regulations and whatever, but there is not a power producer out there that cares one bit about their troubles. All they care about is producing power at the lowest cost, and even coal mining that is totally automated cannot compete with Natural Gas.

It's all about the $$$$$$$.
In my city our coal plant has been shut down and natural gas generators were built in its back lot to replace it.
__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-22-2013, 12:52 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
Most people don't know this, but south east Oklahoma has some of the best coal in the world. That is not a rash statement; it is a fact.

The area was, for about 85 years, a solid producer of high grade coal. In some instances it could be plowed up since it was so close to the ground.

Shortly after oil was discovered in the region all the coal mines shut down. Today the area is a large producer of natural gas and despite there still being enormous amounts of coal in the area there are no working mines.

There were no regulations in place during that era, and coal miners were routinely killed off through accidents, but that's not what shut down the mines.

It was economics. Coal could just not compete with gas and oil.

I don't expect this to change anytime soon.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-22-2013, 12:54 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Golly, no gov mandate necessary.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-23-2013, 08:35 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by jplinville View Post
While many think nuclear is cleaner...look at the waste products from it. We still don't know what to do with the waste. We had a proposed sight for high level radioactive waste, but it was halted by the Obama administration.

Look at the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disasters. While technologically, we have a better handle on nuclear power, the potential for disaster is greater on a larger scale.

Coal and natural gas are safer and easier to control than nuclear, and can be made cleaner than it is now.

Until we have a the ability to safely store the waste somewhere, I don't see nuclear as being safe.

Lets dig a storage facility in the NE and see how well it is received . I am sure it will be well received and welcomed with open arms.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-23-2013, 09:00 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,142
Governor: 6 tanks leaking radioactive waste at Washington nuclear site - CNN.com


just a few leaks to deal with
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-23-2013, 09:29 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by neumann View Post
Lets dig a storage facility in the NE and see how well it is received . I am sure it will be well received and welcomed with open arms.
Suits me.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page