Phish
Flag this Post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by martymcfly If the U.S. leads in a push to outlaw nuclear power domestically and internationally, and continues to push for weapons disarmament, that would be a tremendous way to encourage Iran to stop wasting everyone's time.
After Fukushima, it should be obvious why these facilities are unacceptably risky. What if the solar storm knocked out the power grid, and there was a shortage of diesel fuel? What then? Ticking time bombs, all over the earth. A backup generator is not a safety mechanism, it's a invitation for disaster. Lead by example with good faith, America. Nuclear power is best left to the stars. Let's end the war, end the suffering. Embrace sustainable, localized energy clusters! |
Nuc Power is not going anywhere until there is an economically viable alternative to replace the MWs they produce. Period.
We are long ways from "Sustainable Local energy clusters" supporting mega metropolis and urban centers which have VAST loads of critical infrastructure that need to be supported. These include high voltage consumers. Further even "sustainable, localized energy clusters" will need redundancy and back up. So "if backup generator is not a safety mechanism, it's a invitation for disaster." then what provides the back up to "sustainable, localized energy clusters"?
Finally to this point - while I am not an expert on FERC regs - I believe they require that every large "sustainable plant" (solar / wind) that supplies to the grid MUST HAVE "traditional" backup for every MW of sustainable produced.
Reality =/= Idealism
Just sayin
But Nuke plants aren't economically viable by themselves when all of the costs are considered. Subsidies and essentially ignoring the scope of potential disaster are two critical pieces to keep them even operating.
Fukushima was uninsured... because it was uninsurable... and now the hundreds of billions of dollars will all be passed straight on to the Japanese consumer.
When it comes to the horrors of nuclear power and our capacity to believe that we can ultimately control it, idealism = reality, unfortunately.
Energy storage is coming a long way w/ regard to renewables... I expect we'll be seeing more and more reservoirs/molten salt/other storage methods ramping up to provide consistent baseload power from large renewable sites.
Fukushima was uninsured... because it was uninsurable... and now the hundreds of billions of dollars will all be passed straight on to the Japanese consumer.
When it comes to the horrors of nuclear power and our capacity to believe that we can ultimately control it, idealism = reality, unfortunately.
Energy storage is coming a long way w/ regard to renewables... I expect we'll be seeing more and more reservoirs/molten salt/other storage methods ramping up to provide consistent baseload power from large renewable sites.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120308x1.html
By KAZUAKI NAGATA
Staff writer
Third in a series
Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda assured the nation last December that the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant had been reined in, but as the true extent of the damage inside the crippled reactors remains unknown a year on and with the units still appearing vulnerable to another major quake, many are questioning if the facility really is as stable and secure as both the government and Tepco claim.
Reactor engineers and seismologists believe another nightmare meltdown scenario is unlikely, but say the government and Tokyo Electric Power Co. still face massive obstacles and a host of challenges in decommissioning the plant, including decontaminating the wrecked reactor buildings and plugging cracked containment vessels. Even then, scrapping the plant conceivably could take more than 30 years.
It wasn't until Dec. 16, around nine months after the crisis first erupted, that Noda declared his government and Tepco at long last had tamed the nuclear disaster.
"We have confirmed today that reactors (1, 2 and 3) are now in a state of cold shutdown, and the crisis at the plant thus has been contained," Noda announced.
According to the government and Tepco, the melted nuclear fuel in the wrecked reactor cores is being kept in a cool, stable state and the temperatures at the bottom of their pressure vessels remain below 100 degrees, while the leakage of radioactive materials is being closely monitored and has been drastically reduced — criteria that meet the definition of a cold shutdown.
Now that the Fukushima No. 1 plant has been stabilized, a preparatory phase for decommissioning the reactors has begun, they said.
By KAZUAKI NAGATA
Staff writer
Third in a series
Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda assured the nation last December that the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant had been reined in, but as the true extent of the damage inside the crippled reactors remains unknown a year on and with the units still appearing vulnerable to another major quake, many are questioning if the facility really is as stable and secure as both the government and Tepco claim.
Reactor engineers and seismologists believe another nightmare meltdown scenario is unlikely, but say the government and Tokyo Electric Power Co. still face massive obstacles and a host of challenges in decommissioning the plant, including decontaminating the wrecked reactor buildings and plugging cracked containment vessels. Even then, scrapping the plant conceivably could take more than 30 years.
It wasn't until Dec. 16, around nine months after the crisis first erupted, that Noda declared his government and Tepco at long last had tamed the nuclear disaster.
"We have confirmed today that reactors (1, 2 and 3) are now in a state of cold shutdown, and the crisis at the plant thus has been contained," Noda announced.
According to the government and Tepco, the melted nuclear fuel in the wrecked reactor cores is being kept in a cool, stable state and the temperatures at the bottom of their pressure vessels remain below 100 degrees, while the leakage of radioactive materials is being closely monitored and has been drastically reduced — criteria that meet the definition of a cold shutdown.
Now that the Fukushima No. 1 plant has been stabilized, a preparatory phase for decommissioning the reactors has begun, they said.
Pretty sure there is no "Melted through containment" box in the "Cold Shutdown" checklist there Japan Times/Tepco.
Ditto that for "Leakage of radioactive materials." That'd be ANY leakage, not just 'drastically reduced' leakage.
Stabilized. That's the only word they should be using. Precariously stabilized.
Ditto that for "Leakage of radioactive materials." That'd be ANY leakage, not just 'drastically reduced' leakage.
Stabilized. That's the only word they should be using. Precariously stabilized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dixieland_Gutterman But Nuke plants aren't economically viable by themselves when all of the costs are considered. |
??? Are you talking about capital costs? I am talking about existing nuc plants.
Regardless, that doesnt impact what I am saying about replacing existing generation in the context that I said it.
Mt for later.. just completed a course on nuclear energy
Radioactive Cesium in Urine Of Children In Miyagi, Iwate, Chiba,
France's ACRO (Association pour le Contrôle de la Radioactivité de l'Ouest) released the result of the urine tests of children in Fukushima, Miyagi, Iwate, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa, and Saitama Prefectures.
The the radioactive cesium levels in children in Tokyo, Kanagawa and Saitama were below detection levels, children in Fukushima, Miyagi, Iwate and Chiba (Kashiwa City) were found with radioactive cesium in their urine
Most troubling were the results for children outside Fukushima with rather high levels of radioactive cesium. ACRO suspects that they may come from ingesting contaminated food.
Results show that urines are still contaminated almost one year after 3/11 and are contaminated in places located as far as Oshu (Iwate Pref.) about 220 km from the NPP
Contaminated food could come from home-grown vegetables, or from school lunches in which local produce is used.
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2012/03/radioactive-cesium-in-urine-from.html#comment-form
France's ACRO (Association pour le Contrôle de la Radioactivité de l'Ouest) released the result of the urine tests of children in Fukushima, Miyagi, Iwate, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa, and Saitama Prefectures.
The the radioactive cesium levels in children in Tokyo, Kanagawa and Saitama were below detection levels, children in Fukushima, Miyagi, Iwate and Chiba (Kashiwa City) were found with radioactive cesium in their urine
Most troubling were the results for children outside Fukushima with rather high levels of radioactive cesium. ACRO suspects that they may come from ingesting contaminated food.
Results show that urines are still contaminated almost one year after 3/11 and are contaminated in places located as far as Oshu (Iwate Pref.) about 220 km from the NPP
Contaminated food could come from home-grown vegetables, or from school lunches in which local produce is used.
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2012/03/radioactive-cesium-in-urine-from.html#comment-form
"Nuc Power is not going anywhere until there is an economically viable alternative to replace the MWs they produce. Period."
I'd just like to start by stating what should be obvious, but sadly, is most certainly not: the Earth doesn't care about the economy. If mankind doesn't awake to the true stakes, we will not make it. Ecology is everything.
Nuclear power startup costs are astronomical and the profit margins are wafer thin.
Sustainable, localized energy clusters do not need to support a giant infrastructure, because they are the infrastructure. I'm talking about agricultural communities that do not participate in large scale manufacturing. This is not a solution to all of man's problems, but a vision for a way to live in a reasonable about of modern comfort while embracing a low-impact, agricultural lifestyle. It is a way to relieve pressure upon the greater system. Obviously there are far more people entrenched in the western mindset of material gain, and that situation will not change overnight (if it does, its probably too late).
There is no need for redundancy and backup in an agricultural community that does not depend upon electricity and gas to sustain itself. Electrical generation will be integrated as a bonus, not a necessary. Imagine tribal farming communities with access to the internet and advanced prototyping machines. Yes, this is hippie idealism.
I also believe it is an essential path. We can not continue to ignore the impact we are all having. We must trim the fat in every way we can.
Seriously, we don't need electricity. It is a bonus, but we've brainwashed ourselves into sacrificing everything for it and so many other conveniences. This is psychosis. The Earth will not abide our present approach to energy. The signs are everywhere.
By exploring many avenues forward, and making sacrifices, we can bridge the gap between what we have now, and what will allow us to continue exploring the solar system. If our only priority is to grow the global economy, we will be destroyed by famine and disease. Of this, I have little doubt.
I'd just like to start by stating what should be obvious, but sadly, is most certainly not: the Earth doesn't care about the economy. If mankind doesn't awake to the true stakes, we will not make it. Ecology is everything.
Nuclear power startup costs are astronomical and the profit margins are wafer thin.
Sustainable, localized energy clusters do not need to support a giant infrastructure, because they are the infrastructure. I'm talking about agricultural communities that do not participate in large scale manufacturing. This is not a solution to all of man's problems, but a vision for a way to live in a reasonable about of modern comfort while embracing a low-impact, agricultural lifestyle. It is a way to relieve pressure upon the greater system. Obviously there are far more people entrenched in the western mindset of material gain, and that situation will not change overnight (if it does, its probably too late).
There is no need for redundancy and backup in an agricultural community that does not depend upon electricity and gas to sustain itself. Electrical generation will be integrated as a bonus, not a necessary. Imagine tribal farming communities with access to the internet and advanced prototyping machines. Yes, this is hippie idealism.
I also believe it is an essential path. We can not continue to ignore the impact we are all having. We must trim the fat in every way we can.
Seriously, we don't need electricity. It is a bonus, but we've brainwashed ourselves into sacrificing everything for it and so many other conveniences. This is psychosis. The Earth will not abide our present approach to energy. The signs are everywhere.
By exploring many avenues forward, and making sacrifices, we can bridge the gap between what we have now, and what will allow us to continue exploring the solar system. If our only priority is to grow the global economy, we will be destroyed by famine and disease. Of this, I have little doubt.
we haven't started up a nuc power plant in this country in how many years now? OK then.
That is a sweet blahg that I would like to subscribe too. I love utopian thoughts. Unfortunately I am a realist . Ppl can paint visions and beautiful pictures of what life should be like, but that HARD reality is that TODAY we have millions upon millions in urban centers - with hospitals, schools, water and wastewater treatment plants - etc that need power, and massive amounts of it NON STOP. It we all die tomorrow and restart using your model - then life will be better for those that survive.
Until then we need to find the BEST ways to deal w. the society and civiliazation that is in place an not going anywhere. Do you see Manhatten, Mexico City, Hong Kong, Calcutta etc going away? Cause short of an asteroid crash or MASSIVE epidemic I really dont.
That is a sweet blahg that I would like to subscribe too. I love utopian thoughts. Unfortunately I am a realist . Ppl can paint visions and beautiful pictures of what life should be like, but that HARD reality is that TODAY we have millions upon millions in urban centers - with hospitals, schools, water and wastewater treatment plants - etc that need power, and massive amounts of it NON STOP. It we all die tomorrow and restart using your model - then life will be better for those that survive.
Until then we need to find the BEST ways to deal w. the society and civiliazation that is in place an not going anywhere. Do you see Manhatten, Mexico City, Hong Kong, Calcutta etc going away? Cause short of an asteroid crash or MASSIVE epidemic I really dont.
Millions of people in the world are without jobs.
We have the technology to do manufacture incredible things that only used to be possible only on a large scale. Check this out. Moving forward requires forward thinking. Farming is work. Work is much better than unemployment. I know there are many people who would adopt a low impact agricultural lifestyle if they could keep the internet and have running water and a decent mattress. The sickness of materialism will fall from vogue, it is a simple function of economics. The gap grows, and that gap is a crack in the status quo of all things.
The biggest missing piece has been collective will. To move forward requires forward thinking. Die in the city, or thrive in the country? This path is being forged, and you might be surprised to find how well tended it become in a short amount of time.
We have the technology to do manufacture incredible things that only used to be possible only on a large scale. Check this out. Moving forward requires forward thinking. Farming is work. Work is much better than unemployment. I know there are many people who would adopt a low impact agricultural lifestyle if they could keep the internet and have running water and a decent mattress. The sickness of materialism will fall from vogue, it is a simple function of economics. The gap grows, and that gap is a crack in the status quo of all things.
The biggest missing piece has been collective will. To move forward requires forward thinking. Die in the city, or thrive in the country? This path is being forged, and you might be surprised to find how well tended it become in a short amount of time.
Sweet. Still not answering what I said though. Where is everyone going to go? Further, given the population on earth - it is actually *unsustainable* to have everyone live the way you suggest. Did you ever think about that? While I dont support industrial farming, it provides MASSIVE economies of scale regarding water usage. Ever seen a water economy chart? The US has actually become insanely more water efficient over the last decade. Do you think we have enough water resources in the us - let alone world - for the worlds population to live that way you suggest?
I dream big too, except I dream in the real world...
I dream big too, except I dream in the real world...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy_Al Sweet. Still not answering what I said though. Where is everyone going to go? Further, given the population on earth - it is actually *unsustainable* to have everyone live the way you suggest. Did you ever think about that? While I dont support industrial farming, it provides MASSIVE economies of scale regarding water usage. Ever seen a water economy chart? The US has actually become insanely more water efficient over the last decade. Do you think we have enough water resources in the us - let alone world - for the worlds population to live that way you suggest?
I dream big too, except I dream in the real world... |
You're right, subsidizing corn, destroying water tables, throwing nitrogen everywhere, and piling the unhealthy hordes into a horrifically inefficient medical insurance racket is clearly the way forward.
Not everyone wants to move out of the cities. Many people are quite gainfully employed. The rest are in search of a way out. To suggest that it is no longer possible for large amounts of people to go back to smale scale farming is absurd. Demographics are rapidly shifting. Growth rates are slowing. This fiat global economy is predicated on endless growth, and that phase of human development is quickly coming to an end.
Many variables are changing. I think the real world you live in is in fact constructed in your head, just like everyone else's. A food supply dependent on petroleum is only as efficient as oil is cheap. The long term economics of global food staple trade are against us.
All solutions are stepping stones. They are never complete. There are powerful forces yet to be tapped that will change everything. Oil is really a gross baby formula, and we should be looking for real sustenance instead of sucking down our spit-up.
If nobody is prepared to sacrifice, we will reap a terrible harvest. Those who have nothing left to lose will be the true agents of change. Detroit is going to sell empty adjacent plots of land for $200, and I wouldn't be surprised at all to find more and more gardens going forward. There are many already.
Where did I say any of that?
Signed,
Confused
Signed,
Confused
Ps u never answered any of my questions and seemed to ignore the water efficient fact.
Convenient respOnses are cOnvenient
Convenient respOnses are cOnvenient
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy_Al Ps u never answered any of my questions and seemed to ignore the water efficient fact.
Convenient respOnses are cOnvenient |
The rate at which we are decimating the ecosystem we depend on to survive is, indeed, quite efficient. I would love to see some actual information to back up what you are saying about the modernized, high-transit food system. Somehow I doubt that raising lamb in Australia and shipping it to coastal ports, loading it on trucks, bringing it to distribution hubs, etc. etc. By the time you get to the consumer's plate, you're telling me its more water efficient? Let alone every other factor which you conveniently (your favorite word) ignore?
Response is a two way street, and it seems you're pretty hung up on one unverified statistic of your suggestion. If you want this conversation to continue, you're going to have to put forth a little more.
There are going to be less people. How many less is up to us. We can all eat beef and then die of thirst, or regulate our intake of energy intensive food, and ease our medical bills in the process. Red meat is food of the feast, of the hunt. It isn't meant for daily consumption. Ask any doctor who is up on their shit. Most guys love a good steak. Most guys who intend to live past the age of 45 don't eat it all the time. There's a heck of a lot more to it, but the more that society promotes healthy habits, the healthier society gets.
There is knowledge to be integrated and applied across all fields of study. We need a holistic approach to the way that we interact with our resources. There is no wisdom is destroying the world of our grandchildren. People are awakening to the power we all have, the ability to overcome the appeal to authority that enslaves our minds and our bodies.
Of course it sounds crazy. But I'm confident you know inside that it isn't. We have the power to make great changes, we just need the right ideas to catch on. Everyone's watching now.
I was solely talking about *water efficiency* w regards to Large Agra (and manufacturing). That was the. Context of your specific post when u were speaking about mother earths entire population going bback to micro farming and localized 'cluster' living.
On phone but google asce stAtus of water report and my facts will come up. Hardly unverified
On phone but google asce stAtus of water report and my facts will come up. Hardly unverified
"Context of your specific post when u were speaking about mother earths entire population going bback to micro farming and localized 'cluster' living. "
I specifically said that it was a bridge and that the whole population wouldn't go for it.
Clearly you aren't very interested in having a real discussion. Have a nice day.
I specifically said that it was a bridge and that the whole population wouldn't go for it.
Clearly you aren't very interested in having a real discussion. Have a nice day.
Nope too busy and guess I interpreted your post wrong. PT ing is tough 1 min at a time
uesday, January 31 looked like any other weekday along the coastline of San Onofre. From the freeway, you could see black dots crowding the peak at Lowers and spreading north to Cottons. The parking lot at Old Mans, perpetually full, as old men and blue-collared workers fit a session into their workday. Down the trails at San O, longboarders and SUPers cruised in the shadow of the bluffs, with the busty outline of the nuclear power plant looming from the landscape above.
But on this Tuesday, a warning sensor detected a small leak of radiation released into the local atmosphere, triggered by a malfunction in the Unit 3 reactor, which potentially exposed hundreds of local surfers and beachgoers to nuclear radiation. The facility claims that they were acceptable levels, yet the only monitoring of radiation comes from inside the energy company itself. The incident led to the discovery of extensive damage to tubes carrying radioactive water within the facility and the eventual shutdown of the other reactor two days later. The story, however, has made few headlines. Other than a brief mention on the local news and some online coverage, it has been developing under the radar for more than a month now. Today, both reactors are still offline, and the facility remains under inspection.
On March 11, it will be one year since an earthquake off the east coast of Japan triggered a tsunami that devastated the country and caused the tragic nuclear meltdown in Fukushima. The nuclear power plant in Fukushima was constructed on a tsunami-prone coast, close to range of fault lines in the Pacific Ocean. It was not built and maintained to survive a large-scale disaster, and as a result a 20 km radius of Japanese coastline has now become a nuclear dead-zone. The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) sits just south of San Clemente, adjacent to the world-class waves of Trestles. More than 8 million people live within 50 miles of the plant, which sits in proximity to some of the more active fault lines in the world.
READ MORE: http://www.surfermag.com/features/sound-the-alarm/
But on this Tuesday, a warning sensor detected a small leak of radiation released into the local atmosphere, triggered by a malfunction in the Unit 3 reactor, which potentially exposed hundreds of local surfers and beachgoers to nuclear radiation. The facility claims that they were acceptable levels, yet the only monitoring of radiation comes from inside the energy company itself. The incident led to the discovery of extensive damage to tubes carrying radioactive water within the facility and the eventual shutdown of the other reactor two days later. The story, however, has made few headlines. Other than a brief mention on the local news and some online coverage, it has been developing under the radar for more than a month now. Today, both reactors are still offline, and the facility remains under inspection.
On March 11, it will be one year since an earthquake off the east coast of Japan triggered a tsunami that devastated the country and caused the tragic nuclear meltdown in Fukushima. The nuclear power plant in Fukushima was constructed on a tsunami-prone coast, close to range of fault lines in the Pacific Ocean. It was not built and maintained to survive a large-scale disaster, and as a result a 20 km radius of Japanese coastline has now become a nuclear dead-zone. The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) sits just south of San Clemente, adjacent to the world-class waves of Trestles. More than 8 million people live within 50 miles of the plant, which sits in proximity to some of the more active fault lines in the world.
READ MORE: http://www.surfermag.com/features/sound-the-alarm/
quote from Happy_Al:
"Nuc Power is not going anywhere until there is an economically viable alternative to replace the MWs they produce. Period."
quote from an article at the NY Times:
"All but two of Japan's 54 commercial reactors have gone offline since the nuclear disaster a year ago, after the earthquake and tsunami, and it is not clear when they can be restarted. With the last operating reactor scheduled to be idled as soon as next month, Japan — once one of the world's leaders in atomic energy — will have at least temporarily shut down an industry that once generated a third of its electricity. With few alternatives, the prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, has called for restarting the plants as soon as possible, saying he supports a gradual phase-out of nuclear power over several decades. Yet, fearing public opposition, he has said he will not restart the reactors without the approval of local community leaders."
"Nuc Power is not going anywhere until there is an economically viable alternative to replace the MWs they produce. Period."
quote from an article at the NY Times:
"All but two of Japan's 54 commercial reactors have gone offline since the nuclear disaster a year ago, after the earthquake and tsunami, and it is not clear when they can be restarted. With the last operating reactor scheduled to be idled as soon as next month, Japan — once one of the world's leaders in atomic energy — will have at least temporarily shut down an industry that once generated a third of its electricity. With few alternatives, the prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, has called for restarting the plants as soon as possible, saying he supports a gradual phase-out of nuclear power over several decades. Yet, fearing public opposition, he has said he will not restart the reactors without the approval of local community leaders."
Not sure what Japan has to do w. the US of A, and of course the FERC regulations that we have in place here regarding amount of generation that is need on line or available given demands. Secondly, I believe I read that article a while back and it also indicated that due to the shut down of nucs in Japan, they will likely face rolling blackouts and/or severe shortages during high demand periods this summer. I am sure we can all agree the Japanese culture is much more kind and understanding that the American, and while rolling blackouts of 7-8% of the population may work there, it probably would not fly in the States... The US by sheer size consumes much more power than Japan, and of course, peak demands are much higher as well. That said, I am not sure if Japan institutes Demand Response programs like we do here.
Anyways...the water efficiency numbers I refered to earlier can be found here.
http://www.asce.org/uploadedFiles/Infrastructure/Failure_to_Act/Water%20Report%20Executive%20Summary.pdf
See page 4-6. The chart is on Page 5 w. water efficiency represented as Total Withdrawals vs. population over time. The text on Page 6 supports what I had said in my post.
The reasons for the typing errors in my posts are b.,c I just got a new phone and am learning how to use it. That said, I would love to have a lengthy discussion about this stuff as you are probably getting the wrong idea - I am all about sustainable development and doing what is best for our future. Matter of fact, I just left a very promising job at a well established A/E/P firm w. the immediate potential to run my own Water / Wastewater Engineering department to join / partner w. a woman (MIT Grad) who has developed a niche w.in our (the same) industry performing detailed analysis of operational energy consumption at W/WW and other industrial facilities, and the implementation of energy reducing, sustainable and/or "green" alternatives and methodologies at them. Its very great work and also complex as it requires a great understanding of processes / unit operations / hydraulics (basically anything that consumes energy (and alot of it) at these facilitiles) and determines how they may consume less energy. However, it should be noted that these facilities are REQUIRED in our current civilization so that there is potable water to drink and we arent sending untreated waste back to rivers (very broadly speaking). Also just had 3rd kid so time is extremely limited at home....
Anyways...the water efficiency numbers I refered to earlier can be found here.
http://www.asce.org/uploadedFiles/Infrastructure/Failure_to_Act/Water%20Report%20Executive%20Summary.pdf
See page 4-6. The chart is on Page 5 w. water efficiency represented as Total Withdrawals vs. population over time. The text on Page 6 supports what I had said in my post.
The reasons for the typing errors in my posts are b.,c I just got a new phone and am learning how to use it. That said, I would love to have a lengthy discussion about this stuff as you are probably getting the wrong idea - I am all about sustainable development and doing what is best for our future. Matter of fact, I just left a very promising job at a well established A/E/P firm w. the immediate potential to run my own Water / Wastewater Engineering department to join / partner w. a woman (MIT Grad) who has developed a niche w.in our (the same) industry performing detailed analysis of operational energy consumption at W/WW and other industrial facilities, and the implementation of energy reducing, sustainable and/or "green" alternatives and methodologies at them. Its very great work and also complex as it requires a great understanding of processes / unit operations / hydraulics (basically anything that consumes energy (and alot of it) at these facilitiles) and determines how they may consume less energy. However, it should be noted that these facilities are REQUIRED in our current civilization so that there is potable water to drink and we arent sending untreated waste back to rivers (very broadly speaking). Also just had 3rd kid so time is extremely limited at home....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy_Al we haven't started up a nuc power plant in this country in how many years now? OK then.
That is a sweet blahg that I would like to subscribe too. I love utopian thoughts. Unfortunately I am a realist . Ppl can paint visions and beautiful pictures of what life should be like, but that HARD reality is that TODAY we have millions upon millions in urban centers - with hospitals, schools, water and wastewater treatment plants - etc that need power, and massive amounts of it NON STOP. It we all die tomorrow and restart using your model - then life will be better for those that survive. Until then we need to find the BEST ways to deal w. the society and civiliazation that is in place an not going anywhere. Do you see Manhatten, Mexico City, Hong Kong, Calcutta etc going away? Cause short of an asteroid crash or MASSIVE epidemic I really dont. |
what you seem to be saying is why try to make things better. this is the mentality that will ruin us as a civilization.
Yeah....NO. that is exactly NOT what I am saying. Mostly the opposite. Matter of fact (if you keep reading posts) i am doing all I can to make things better.
The FACT is that in 2007, more than 50% of the worlds population tipped over to urban living from rural living...ie there are more ppl living in urban centers than there are living in rural areas. I did not do this. None of us did. But that is a fact of our world. I am doing my part (live simply, consume very little, and most importantly focused my ENTIRE career on the environment,) but at the same time I am not going to run to the hills and live an isolated - even super sustainable - life if you will. I am going to do all i can to help the rest of the world that lives this way, do my best to change it, and maybe just maybe, through my actions, others will all start making wiser decisions as well....
And remember the context of the post you quoted is w. regards to energy. As of today - this second - todays urban centers need *power*. We can not simply make them dark until there is enough sustainable energy generated to power them again. Therefore, we need to make our urban centers as efficient and have as little impact on mother earth (or "green" even though hate that word) as possible until that time comes....that is what I have devoted MY life too...
The FACT is that in 2007, more than 50% of the worlds population tipped over to urban living from rural living...ie there are more ppl living in urban centers than there are living in rural areas. I did not do this. None of us did. But that is a fact of our world. I am doing my part (live simply, consume very little, and most importantly focused my ENTIRE career on the environment,) but at the same time I am not going to run to the hills and live an isolated - even super sustainable - life if you will. I am going to do all i can to help the rest of the world that lives this way, do my best to change it, and maybe just maybe, through my actions, others will all start making wiser decisions as well....
And remember the context of the post you quoted is w. regards to energy. As of today - this second - todays urban centers need *power*. We can not simply make them dark until there is enough sustainable energy generated to power them again. Therefore, we need to make our urban centers as efficient and have as little impact on mother earth (or "green" even though hate that word) as possible until that time comes....that is what I have devoted MY life too...
That's not what he's saying at all.
He's discussing the best way to go about making things better, although I'll admit he's doing a bit of a muddled job of it.
We're all on the same side here.
Congrats on the startup Al! I'm just about to switch firms again myself. Not too thrilled about it, honestly, but there should be some opportunity there. Not sure why the end of your post there seemed to start arguing for WWTP's.... I don't think anyone's against treating our wastewater :).
The fact of the matter is, cities are very efficient with regards to person/GDP, our most base way of gauging productive efficiency. Cities can and will absolutely be a part of our sustainable future. It would be easier to do if the air quality was better... makes for better urban gardens and farming... and a significant help there would be electric automobiles, which sends you back to the power grid, which sends you back to nuclear power if you're really going to be putting the MASSIVE additional loads of powering the automobile sector via electricity.
At this point we need trillions to retrofit/close/renovate our existing nuclear infrastructure. I fear that we'll neglect the old if we go on to build new before handling the old. It costs tens of billions just to close one of these fucking things down.
In summary, we need to start using highways and parking lots to generate electricity. :)
He's discussing the best way to go about making things better, although I'll admit he's doing a bit of a muddled job of it.
We're all on the same side here.
Congrats on the startup Al! I'm just about to switch firms again myself. Not too thrilled about it, honestly, but there should be some opportunity there. Not sure why the end of your post there seemed to start arguing for WWTP's.... I don't think anyone's against treating our wastewater :).
The fact of the matter is, cities are very efficient with regards to person/GDP, our most base way of gauging productive efficiency. Cities can and will absolutely be a part of our sustainable future. It would be easier to do if the air quality was better... makes for better urban gardens and farming... and a significant help there would be electric automobiles, which sends you back to the power grid, which sends you back to nuclear power if you're really going to be putting the MASSIVE additional loads of powering the automobile sector via electricity.
At this point we need trillions to retrofit/close/renovate our existing nuclear infrastructure. I fear that we'll neglect the old if we go on to build new before handling the old. It costs tens of billions just to close one of these fucking things down.
In summary, we need to start using highways and parking lots to generate electricity. :)
And a point on your rolling blackouts and whether or not we would 'stand' for them...
...history has shown that we have no choice, and there was no rebellion. ::Points to california energy crisis in 2000/2001::
Of course those were brought on not by necessity, but by pure, unadulterated greed. Nuke Plants running at 50% capacity simply because they knew where the sweet spot was in supply/demand to create the highest possible price for their product. Total artificial scarcity as California providing plants were outputting a mere 60% of their total generating capacity.
If we can do it in the name of making the corporations a few extra millions, do you think we can do it in the name of saving our country and planet?
...history has shown that we have no choice, and there was no rebellion. ::Points to california energy crisis in 2000/2001::
Of course those were brought on not by necessity, but by pure, unadulterated greed. Nuke Plants running at 50% capacity simply because they knew where the sweet spot was in supply/demand to create the highest possible price for their product. Total artificial scarcity as California providing plants were outputting a mere 60% of their total generating capacity.
If we can do it in the name of making the corporations a few extra millions, do you think we can do it in the name of saving our country and planet?
Al - had not finished reading your posts when i responded. after doing so it still seems like you feel that society should be coddled and not made to feel uncomfortable. i feel like the opposite is true. people adapt to whatever situation they are presented with under most circumstances. it seems as though forcing renewables and or lower power usage on a mentally lazy society like the US (generally speaking) might open the eyes of the masses to the fact that we are confusing our WANTS with our NEEDS. it isn't that you don't do enough to help or you aren't trying hard enough. its a matter of perspective.
^^ YES. Exactly. My mind often goes alot faster than I can type (especially when on phone) and w. limited time to post now a days, my thoughts don not get presented as clear as they should be.
That said, you are spot on that cities ARE a part of a sustainable future. There is just NO WAY our earth can support the amount of ppl currently on it if we all lived rural, farming - so called "self sufficient" - lives. This is a fact. And along w. urban centers comes the need to feed these ppl and hence larger farms. There is just no ways around this - period - unless we somehow kill a few billion ppl off this earth tomorrow (and that is NOT a discussion I am getting into)....
That said, agree 100% that based on current available technology - our best *immediate* future would be electric cars powered by nuc plants. I think that is undeniable. But of course it gets back to the nuc safety and why we are in this thread to begin with. It may be a high risk way of generating power but the frequency of said risk is extremely minimal and takes a freak accident like a 9.0 earthquake in the exact right spot creating the perfect tsunami in the exact right spot to happen. Fukashima was a black swan event - force majure - as we call it in our industry. When you do a Risk Analysis / Management / Mitigation black swans are the ones that you usually can not plan for. But some people think that even that much risk exposure is too much....I - personally - do not think that but of course MANY do.
Also agree 100% on the need to properly decommision or rehabilitate existing plants. Not nearly enough $$$ goes to infrastructure in this country...instead it goes to ...well, I am not going to go there....
And Dixie THANKS GREATLY for the well wishes on the new job...wasn't looking but this opportunity came up and it was something that I didnt want to pass up...
That said, you are spot on that cities ARE a part of a sustainable future. There is just NO WAY our earth can support the amount of ppl currently on it if we all lived rural, farming - so called "self sufficient" - lives. This is a fact. And along w. urban centers comes the need to feed these ppl and hence larger farms. There is just no ways around this - period - unless we somehow kill a few billion ppl off this earth tomorrow (and that is NOT a discussion I am getting into)....
That said, agree 100% that based on current available technology - our best *immediate* future would be electric cars powered by nuc plants. I think that is undeniable. But of course it gets back to the nuc safety and why we are in this thread to begin with. It may be a high risk way of generating power but the frequency of said risk is extremely minimal and takes a freak accident like a 9.0 earthquake in the exact right spot creating the perfect tsunami in the exact right spot to happen. Fukashima was a black swan event - force majure - as we call it in our industry. When you do a Risk Analysis / Management / Mitigation black swans are the ones that you usually can not plan for. But some people think that even that much risk exposure is too much....I - personally - do not think that but of course MANY do.
Also agree 100% on the need to properly decommision or rehabilitate existing plants. Not nearly enough $$$ goes to infrastructure in this country...instead it goes to ...well, I am not going to go there....
And Dixie THANKS GREATLY for the well wishes on the new job...wasn't looking but this opportunity came up and it was something that I didnt want to pass up...
also Al- not trying to argue with you. many of your points are spot on. i simply disagree with how we should go about improving the way things are.
I do not know enough about how long the 2000 rolling blackouts in CA lasted, but after a quick search (and based on my memory) those were for 2 days and ppl could prepare for them / knew how long they would be. Also as indicated that was indeed greed and market manipulation and not necessity. Japan is looking at much worse I believe.
I am sure ppl would adjust and I understand what you are saying about WANTS vs NEEDS, but when you start talking about wants vs needs you begin to tread a very fine line about the principles that this country was founded upon. Just keep that in mind.......
I am sure ppl would adjust and I understand what you are saying about WANTS vs NEEDS, but when you start talking about wants vs needs you begin to tread a very fine line about the principles that this country was founded upon. Just keep that in mind.......
"Fukashima was a black swan event - force majure - as we call it in our industry. When you do a Risk Analysis / Management / Mitigation black swans are the ones that you usually can not plan for. But some people think that even that much risk exposure is too much....I - personally - do not think that but of course MANY do. "
This is a fallacy. The facility was supposed to be prepared for an earthquake, but it wasn't. Clearly it wasn't remotely prepared for the tsunami. Most importantly, it wasn't prepared for any kind of meltdown scenario. Having all the fuel on site, above the reactors... it's so far beyond irresponsible.
There is a fundamental flaw to nuclear technology: the corporations that run them. Corporations do not have ethics, they have shareholders. A penny pinching, beat the last quarter mentality is simply incompatible with best practices in a situation with the massive risk factors nuclear presents.
I think it is the height of arrogance, and a supreme misinterpretation of what occurred in Japan that gives you the mentality that you have right now. Your faith is unfounded.
This is a fallacy. The facility was supposed to be prepared for an earthquake, but it wasn't. Clearly it wasn't remotely prepared for the tsunami. Most importantly, it wasn't prepared for any kind of meltdown scenario. Having all the fuel on site, above the reactors... it's so far beyond irresponsible.
There is a fundamental flaw to nuclear technology: the corporations that run them. Corporations do not have ethics, they have shareholders. A penny pinching, beat the last quarter mentality is simply incompatible with best practices in a situation with the massive risk factors nuclear presents.
I think it is the height of arrogance, and a supreme misinterpretation of what occurred in Japan that gives you the mentality that you have right now. Your faith is unfounded.