Coal-powered airplane

[Fixtur]

#1- “Some sort of storage plan” for the nuke waste is (for the moment) “let’s just put this stuff over here at the edge of the plant’s property until we can figure out what to do with it.” In other words, there is no plan, nor is there likely to be one. Figuring that out should be P1 if we’re going to lean on nuclear to get us off fossil fuels.

I’m not at all opposed to nukes operationally, but until we figure out the what-do-we-do-with-the-highly-poisonous-for-longer-than-we’ve-been-a-species-waste issue that’s a no from me dawg.

#2 Fiberglass is recyclable. No economic to do so now, but the barriers are surmountable.

 

[Lawman]

Oh that’s totally just like highly radioactive waste that is lethal for over a million years.

Heavy metals like Mercury and Cadmium are toxic forever. When you’re talking about an “environmentally clean” method of power and referring to Solar as an example, you’re talking about powering humanity with tens of thousands of square miles of photovoltaic cells, which have to be replaced every couple of decades. Now think of it in the way of a worldwide problem… 10s of thousands of photocells to dispose of with no cheap or viable method of doing so, so we dump them in a landfill because to the onlooker “this is green energy.” It’s not regulated and observed with any effect. It’s only something that’s started to be paid attention to now as we have spend a few decades looking and studying the effects of throwing away modern technology.

That’s the problem with the “but nuclear waste!” side of the argument, it ignores the real conservationist and environmental science people making an informed risk analysis. For all the fear in the number of metric tons in nuclear waste the actual density of the fuel and physical size of what is generated make it a manageable problem.

In 60 years of nuclear power generation we have produced enough nuclear fuel to still store it mostly by means of dry cask. And of the “thousands of years…” only 3% of the waste actually lasts beyond the dozen-hundred years. Of that we stick all of it in a dry storage cask at ~10 tons a cask. It’s monitored, it’s inspected, it’s respected for what it is, and in 60 years and 100 total reactors in the country we still have so few of them they get stored in site. We could lower that number if we mandated or incentivized recycling fuel like the French do. Contrast that with the something like the idea of a Solar America. How well do you think we would manage the continuous manufacture and disposal 7.8 billion solar panels which is enough acreage to cover half the state of Tennessee.

Take a look at the way the world sends its waste disposal to the poor areas of the world where regulation simply don’t exist. The ship breaker operations in Bangladesh as a great example. What do you think the developed world with more money and less square footage will do with a problem like “what do we do with this junk full of heavy metals… We can’t put it around our water table….”

Nuclear isn’t a build it and throw it away solution to fixing a problem. It’s a viable way to produce the volume of power needed and get 200-300 years further as a species pushing to develop things to replace it. And because of the density of energy produced it can do that while at the same time it maintains a scalable growth in negatives that we can absorb and manage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Lawman]

#1- “Some sort of storage plan” for the nuke waste is (for the moment) “let’s just put this stuff over here at the edge of the plant’s property until we can figure out what to do with it.” In other words, there is no plan, nor is there likely to be one. Figuring that out should be P1 if we’re going to lean on nuclear to get us off fossil fuels.

I’m not at all opposed to nukes operationally, but until we figure out the what-do-we-do-with-the-highly-poisonous-for-longer-than-we’ve-been-a-species-waste issue that’s a no from me dawg.

#2 Fiberglass is recyclable. No economic to do so now, but the barriers are surmountable.

Point of order…

the Federal government promised the people making these plants an approved offsite storage facility and reneged. (Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982)

The US government actually pays these companies for their onsite storage. Not the other way around. And there was a plan… it died when Nevada said “you can’t store that here! We won’t allow any radiation in our soil!” While ignoring that the old nuclear weapons test site full of ground detonations prior to the test ban treaty is about 18 miles away.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Boris Badenov]

All of our current energy solutions have attendant problems, as Lawman points out. Windmills massacre birds, hydro has ALL SORTS of weird downstream (if you'll pardon the expression) consequences THAT WE KNOW ABOUT. Until fusion arrives (I hear it's just twenty years away), we're in the danger-mitigation game, not the danger-elimination game.

 

[DropTank]

The blades are fiberglass and life limited. They can't be recycled so they're being chopped up and stacked up into what are basically landfills. They aren't biodegradable so I don't know what the plan is but they're still piling up.

GE announces first US wind turbine blade recycling program with Veolia

The blades were the only part of the turbines not getting recycled, and will now be shredded to replace raw materials currently used for cement manufacturing, resulting in lower CO2 emissions.

www.utilitydive.com

"Can't be recycled"

I do know what IS recycled,
Your tired arguments.

 

[zmiller4]

All of our current energy solutions have attendant problems, as Lawman points out. Windmills massacre birds, hydro has ALL SORTS of weird downstream (if you'll pardon the expression) consequences THAT WE KNOW ABOUT. Until fusion arrives (I hear it's just twenty years away), we're in the danger-mitigation game, not the danger-elimination game.

Completely agree with this. I’d argue that the single biggest current danger is carbon emissions, but that’s based on a century of observations on the effects of powering the vast majority of the planet via hydrocarbons. I don’t doubt that we’d learn about some issues with newer energy sources as they become more prominent. That’s *not* a reason not to eventually shift away from hydrocarbons, just a need to be aware that there’s always going to be environmental trade offs.

 

[knot4u]

GE announces first US wind turbine blade recycling program with Veolia

The blades were the only part of the turbines not getting recycled, and will now be shredded to replace raw materials currently used for cement manufacturing, resulting in lower CO2 emissions.

www.utilitydive.com

"Can't be recycled"

I do know what IS recycled,
Your tired arguments.

They've recycled 101 blades at one plant in Missouri as of 12/2020 in a new program. The article says that burying them in landfills is the most affordable option. I would not say that recycling the blades is common and I'd guess most will continue to end up in landfills.

 

[Richman]

Catastrophic windmill failures make for good youboob.

 

[BEEF SUPREME]

Catastrophic windmill failures make for good youboob.

Friday Fails is my favorite thing on YouTube


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stroboli62]

They've recycled 101 blades at one plant in Missouri as of 12/2020 in a new program. The article says that burying them in landfills is the most affordable option. I would not say that recycling the blades is common and I'd guess most will continue to end up in landfills.

Ooooooo

101 blades recycled...oooh a stunner of a fact...so much for those supporting "effective recycling" program

A pile of em on I35 North to the Twin Cities at about MM 163 if I am correct.....cut up 4th or 5th....yeah baby, reaaaal effective

I am surprised industry hasn't taken the US Army burn pit route....but we got EPA....3rd World doesn't....LOLOL

 

[Richman]

The moral of the story is that to move up the tech ladder, you’re gonna have to chop down some trees.

Until Lockheed makes good on their promise of a small fusion plant, smoke if you got’em.

That all said, we could have cheap solar, fusion and shipstones, and people would still find something to complain about. It’s not really about the environment with some people.

Throwing your fist in the air and chanting down with the man is a far more effective in getting dates than toiling away in a cubicle or landing that sweet gig as head mechanic at Tire Kingdom.

 

[knot4u]

The moral of the story is that to move up the tech ladder, you’re gonna have to chop down some trees.

Until Lockheed makes good on their promise of a small fusion plant, smoke if you got’em.

That all said, we could have cheap solar, fusion and shipstones, and people would still find something to complain about. It’s not really about the environment with some people.

Throwing your fist in the air and chanting down with the man is a far more effective in getting dates than toiling away in a cubicle or landing that sweet gig as head mechanic at Tire Kingdom.

That's all true, but it doesn't address the issue that wind turbines are not waste free, which was the only point I was trying to make. I'm not arguing against it, I was simply pointing out that it does have a physical environmental impact at this point in time. Perhaps in the future it will be more cost effective to recycle the blades versus burying them, power companies are in business to make profits for their shareholders, not to save the world. In the article posted it says over 10000 of those blades are coming due for replacement very soon, we need to either find a way to recycle them or figure out a way to turn them into homeless housing ASAP.

 

[Richman]

That's all true, but it doesn't address the issue that wind turbines are not waste free, which was the only point I was trying to make. I'm not arguing against it, I was simply pointing out that it does have a physical environmental impact at this point in time. Perhaps in the future it will be more cost effective to recycle the blades versus burying them, power companies are in business to make profits for their shareholders, not to save the world. In the article posted it says over 10000 of those blades are coming due for replacement very soon, we need to either find a way to recycle them or figure out a way to turn them into homeless housing ASAP.

Not arguing this point at all. Were it not for government subsidies, I doubt they’d ever have been erected in the first place.

Of course, the same thing could be said for railroads.

My point is be wary of people working too hard to make a point or press a position.

 

[knot4u]

Not arguing this point at all. Were it not for government subsidies, I doubt they’d ever have been erected in the first place.

Of course, the same thing could be said for railroads.

My point is be wary of people working too hard to make a point or press a position.

The fact that everyone seems to be so binary online discourages productive communication.

 

[DropTank]

They've recycled 101 blades at one plant in Missouri as of 12/2020 in a new program. The article says that burying them in landfills is the most affordable option. I would not say that recycling the blades is common and I'd guess most will continue to end up in landfills.

You should stretch before moving those goal posts.
Hospitals are full right now
(best to avoid injury)

 

[derg]

The emotional “the feels” argument against Trump. Yawn. Dignity and self respect? After watching Biden’s horrendous UN speech, it’s clear we’re worse off.

I’m just tickled pink your people spent $6 million to learn that your Orange friend lost even worse in AZ.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

I’m just tickled pink your people spent $6 million to learn that your Orange friend lost even worse in AZ.

I’m not for that. It should have never happened, a colossal waste of money and time.

 

[derg]

I’m not for that. It should have never happened, a colossal waste of money and time.

So perhaps an education campaign about how voting works or are pilots actually deadset on only in-person voting when that would basically assure that most of us would never vote again?

 

[Hiboglossi]

a colossal waste of money and time.

A very profitable grift for Cyber Ninjas though.

I’m just tickled pink your people spent $6 million to learn that your Orange friend lost even worse in AZ.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1441535301185249285

Now that even the "audit" couldn't show a Trump victory, there's a new conspiracy theory: Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers claims a fire at a Tonopah chicken farm back in March was actually a coverup for The Left destroying ballots that would have delivered Arizona to Trump.

 

[Fixtur]

These people are nucking futs.