|
Mortabis posted:Solar and wind are not practical sources of baseload power. Nuclear power is. Nuclear accidents are extremely uncommon and have caused very few casualties. My state runs entirely off wind and solar and the extra is fed into a Tesla battery farm for use when conditions are poor. We are selling our excess to other states of Australia that currently aren't able to get power from their local (coal) plants because the infrastructure is damaged due to the raging infernos going on here right now. Nuclear does make sense in areas where wind/solar aren't possible by virtue of local wind/sun conditions though. Still way better than coal/gas. Carth Dookie fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jan 13, 2020 |
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 11:46 |
|
|
I heard there's a lot going on in air defense artillery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 05:18
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I heard there's a lot going on in air defense artillery. Yeah it’s p busy nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 05:31
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I heard there's a lot going on in air defense artillery. The first thing in that video is a ADATS live fire. Neat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 05:47
|
|
|
In 2017 I saw the USS Intrepid in NYC, here's some photos I took (I'll probably post one half tonight the other tomorrow). Galaxy S8 photography, sorry in advance. Concorde (G-BOAD), such a sleek aircraft to see in person    F-16, looks so clean without all the new sensor pods and fuel tanks  A-12, the predecessor to the Blackbird  F-14 Super Tomcat   A-6E Intruder, perhaps the cutest thing with wings to kill people 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 06:12
|
|
|
This is my favorite thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 07:02
|
|
|
buy it as a dang tshirt or something!  Vincent Van Goatse posted:I heard there's a lot going on in air defense artillery. :iran:
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
The op is missing "When the wind blows" in the list of movies that will make you depressed to death  
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 09:08
|
|
|
The Missile https://youtu.be/bZe5J8SVCYQ There is a Bear in the Woods https://youtu.be/o7EJMyL6htw There Will Come Soft Rains https://youtu.be/5LNHYz89sNc Hannibal Rex fucked around with this message at 09:58 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 09:55
|
|
|
*for attendance* Here
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 10:36
|
|
|
Ground zero on this the Cold War II thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 12:21
|
|
|
Seapower!
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 12:48
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Seapower! That’s not how it works!
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 12:49
|
|
|
clearly a brown water airforce
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 13:12
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:baseload power isn't what you think it is. it's the minimum demand on the system required to keep large power plants economical to operate, not the minimum required supply. “The baseload[1] (also base load) on a grid is the minimum level of demand on an electrical grid over a span of time, for example, one week.”
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 13:51
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:India is going all in on thorium reactors and expects to start having them go online starting 2025 and China will follow soon after. 2.3 billion people abandoning coal as a power source is a drat good start. Fully embracing electric vehicles in major markets around the same time will help. Now if we could plant a few billion trees and do something about microplastics as well, we might survive. Sorry, should have clearer - I'm talking about places like Britain or Germany which no longer have native nuclear industries and therefore starting a nuclear building program now just doesn't make a lot of sense considering the time and expense, so the argument against nuclear is not just "NUCLEAR BAD". Obviously if you already have a lot of investment in nuclear already (like the countries countries you mentioned) it makes a lot more sense. I also don't know anything about environmental movements in India and China and their attitudes to nuclear either though so 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:“The baseload[1] (also base load) on a grid is the minimum level of demand on an electrical grid over a span of time, for example, one week.” provided for contrast to the other article, sorry for not making that clear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 14:12
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:provided for contrast to the other article, sorry for not making that clear. Then I’ll just say the other article is wrong, and the simulated environment they were looking at included an assumption of perfect weather prediction. But there’s an energy generation thread we should take this to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 14:23
|
|
|
My favorite Cold War picture is from Ukraine 2015:
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 14:28
|
|
|
What's with 'Alaskan discretionary' 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:06
|
|
Tias posted:What's with 'Alaskan discretionary' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s93KC4AGKnY
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Sorry, should have clearer - I'm talking about places like Britain or Germany which no longer have native nuclear industries and therefore starting a nuclear building program now just doesn't make a lot of sense considering the time and expense, so the argument against nuclear is not just "NUCLEAR BAD". You're not wrong, but what I saw in Germany post-Fukishima wasn't "oh, this isn't really economically feasible because we don't have the native industry spooled up." I mean, sure, probably a few policy wonks were going off about that but at the level of what you saw the media reporting and the protesters doing and the politicians saying it was 100% about mushroom clouds blotting out the sun. The better end of it talked about Chernobyl and the worst-case predictions in the immediate aftermath of Fukishima. IIRC Germany at the time actually had some nuclear plants which were immediately brought offline in the aftermath, kind of ignoring that, unlike the Japanese plants, they weren't located on the coast in a very seismically active part of the world. I'm sure they were old and probably needed retiring anyway, but it wasn't like they had zero experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
Solar power is not going to be cheaper than nuclear power in Germany and the amount of time required to build a plant is not a factor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:25
|
|
|
I'll add that Germany really likes to tout how strong it is in renewables and they've made a hell of a push. They're over a third of total generation being done via renewables at this point, which is really commendable. They're also one of the world's largest consumers of coal, generating 40% of their electricity with it at the moment (The US is 27% electrical generation via coal, to put things in perspective, also iirc US coal is significantly cleaner burning). They've promised to shut down all their coal-fired power plants in the next 20 years as part of their climate change commitments, but what they're going to replace it with is a big, open question. I think the smart money is on LNG, but while that's better than east german brown coal it's still not exactly a long term solution from a climate change perspective. Full disclaimer: I'm a huge fan of nuclear power for baseload. I'm insanely skeptical about our ability to ween our societies off of our insane power consumption before we reach an absolute crisis point, and baring that the answer is to provide as much energy as cleanly as possible. Nuclear has a ton of problems, from cost to complexity to dealing with the waste. It's still better than every other baseload option we have at the moment. Maybe we'll have something way better in 20 years, but we need to start curtailing emissions today, not 20 years in the future. Renewables are going to be a huge part of that, but right now they're not a sufficient answer to get us off of fossil fuels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:31
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:You're not wrong, but what I saw in Germany post-Fukishima wasn't "oh, this isn't really economically feasible because we don't have the native industry spooled up." I mean, sure, probably a few policy wonks were going off about that but at the level of what you saw the media reporting and the protesters doing and the politicians saying it was 100% about mushroom clouds blotting out the sun. The better end of it talked about Chernobyl and the worst-case predictions in the immediate aftermath of Fukishima. IIRC, Germans have had a pretty huge anti-nuclear movement during the cold war. I think that it still informs their psyche as far as peaceful use of nuclear power is concerned. It is almost a taboo subject for them. They don't see plants, but bombs ticking. Fukushima was indeed a catalyst for pushing Merkel over the top on this, and closing the plants early. But I think that nuclear energy for that country was going to die, one way or the other. Which is pretty bad. Because in general, there is no way to speed up humanity's move away from fossil fuels if we don't scale up nuclear production. A mix of 30-35% hydro and nuclear with the rest going to renewables is touted by many as the only technically realistic option for doing this without the planet cooking up in the meanwhile. While technically realistic, this option sadly seems to be politically impossible, at least for now. Dante80 fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:IIRC, Germans have had a pretty huge anti-nuclear movement during the cold war. I think that it still informs their psyche as far as peaceful use of nuclear power is concerned. It is almost a taboo subject for them. They don't see plants, but bombs ticking. Yeah. Being anti-nuclear (weapons or bombs, you're right that there isn't really a distinction in the way it's talked about) has become a generic kind of respectable, consensus, middle class opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Yeah. Being anti-nuclear (weapons or bombs, you're right that there isn't really a distinction in the way it's talked about) has become a generic kind of respectable, consensus, middle class opinion. It annoys me because that it should be none of those things. It’s just fueled by pseudoscience and fearmongering. Like sure Nukes are dangerous, but by pretty much every important metric they are the best answer outside of like giant solar fields in Arizona charging capacitors that don’t exist yet. Mazz fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
People seem pretty decent at comprehending a big, very rare nuclear disaster but less so at understanding cumulative deaths and climate impact from extracting and burning fossil fuels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:47
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:People seem pretty decent at comprehending a big, very rare nuclear disaster but less so at understanding cumulative deaths and climate impact from extracting and burning fossil fuels. This is par for the course though. Unless said people live near a coal plant. Here is a lovely view from my country. 
Dante80 fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
It’s that way with all kinds of things. People can comprehend the inherent risk in driving a motorcycle but they’ll stay 30 lbs overweight for decades.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:50
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It’s that way with all kinds of things. People can comprehend the inherent risk in driving a motorcycle but they’ll stay 30 lbs overweight for decades. I feel attacked
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It’s that way with all kinds of things. People can comprehend the inherent risk in driving a motorcycle but they’ll stay 30 lbs overweight for decades. you gotta lick it before we kick it
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Yeah. Being anti-nuclear (weapons or bombs, you're right that there isn't really a distinction in the way it's talked about) has become a generic kind of respectable, consensus, middle class opinion. That's why Euratom wasn't fully merged into the European Union, contrarily to its sister organizations the EEC and ECSC. It's been kept out of reach of the European Parliament to be protected from clueless anti-nuclear MEPs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
If the US Navy can keep our ancient carriers from melting down then I don’t see the big deal with reactors liberally sprinkled all over the US. If you don’t like then you must hate are sailors since they be the ones most likely working on them once they get out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
I wonder how much American nukophobia stems from the fact that TMI happened less than 2 weeks after The China Syndrome premiered. I imagine the reporting around that was calm and measured. NYT article where experts weigh in on how realistic the movie was, published 10 days before TMI. quote:John Taylor is the vice president in charge of reactors at the Westinghouse Electric Corp. Thirty‐eight Westinghouse reactors are now in operation around the world, and 71 more are in various stages of construction and design. It was Mr. Taylor who felt the film assassinated the character of all the officials in the nuclear industry: “What hurt me most about this film is that the utility chairman and the plant foreman are portrayed as morally corrupt and insensitive to their responsibilities to society. That view is inaccurate and incredible.” zoux fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 17:41
|
|
zoux posted:I wonder how much nukophobia stems from the fact that TMI happened less than 2 weeks after The China Syndrome premiered. I imagine the reporting around that was calm and measured. There was a huge lack of accurate information from the operators of TMI which greatly contributed to the panic/distrust.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:My favorite Cold War picture is from Ukraine 2015: GET OUT OF HERE STALKER
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
Also our most well-known depiction of a nuclear power plant owner is Mr. Burns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 18:36
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:Also our most well-known depiction of a nuclear power plant owner is Mr. Burns. With a healthy dose of lording over soviet failures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 11:46 |
|
|
zoux posted:I wonder how much American nukophobia stems from the fact that TMI happened less than 2 weeks after The China Syndrome premiered. I imagine the reporting around that was calm and measured. I don't know how much the china syndrome factored into it, but I do know my mom was turned hard core anti-nuclear by TMI. She lived in Oregon at the time and to hear her tell about it she thought there was a Chernobyl -like plume of radiation going down the east coast. I have distinct memories of standing in a field when I was like. . . 4 or so changing "hey hey ho ho nuclear power has got to go" at a protest against either building or expanding some PacNW plant. I think somewhere around Portland. Yet at the same time she had no idea the Hanford Site existed until I told her a couple of years ago. edit: "don't let your kids look at the microwave while it's cooking or they'll get brain cancer" was also pretty common advice I heard from a bunch of parents in my circle when I was a kid. Not just hippies, normal middle class educated people. There was a LOT of dumb, weird poo poo around nuclear or "nuclear" (in the case of loving microwaves) in the 80s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 19:03
|
|