People are taught lies and they are taught to be ignorant at all ages

You are living proof of this, for sure.

Every conservative accusation is a confession.

Solar can't provide 100% of our energy needs as long as clouds exist.

[ableist slur redacted]

I know your parents raised you better than to talk like that.

That's why we have to supplement it with wind, etc.

The best solution (seriously) is Nuclear, and has been for decades.

I respectfully disagree that it's the *best* solution, on the grounds that the waste has to be dealt with for a disproportionately long time after it's generated. But it *is* a better solution than fossil fuels.

-̹ƒlian

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary * bbs.archaicbinary.net

The best solution (seriously) is Nuclear, and has been for decades.

I respectfully disagree that it's the *best* solution, on the grounds that the >waste has to be dealt with for a disproportionately long time after it's >generated. But it *is* a better solution than fossil fuels.

For a few years now, some companies have been experimenting with using the waste as a fuel source until it is no longer radioactive. Because most
people hear "nuclear" and are turned off by that, I don't know how far
those experiments have gone.

PBS's "Nova" had an episode about it a few years back. The episode also included mention of an experiment with a reactor in Idaho that would shut itself down before a potentially out-of-control reaction could become
critical. The experiment was a success but, unfortunately for those
conducting it, it happened on or very near the same day as the Chernobyl disaster.


* SLMR 2.1a * Procrastination Day Has Been Postponed!
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: [ANSI] Re: [ANSI] Trump o
By: halian to Gamgee on Fri Aug 09 2024 04:20 pm

The best solution (seriously) is Nuclear, and has been for decades.

I respectfully disagree that it's the *best* solution, on the grounds that the waste has to be dealt with for a disproportionately long time after it's generated. But it *is* a better solution than fossil fuels.

Nuclear is great because a lot of waste can be recycled for making weapons of mass destruction, which is something superpowers love, apparently.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: [ANSI] Re: [ANSI] Trump o
By: Arelor to halian on Sun Aug 11 2024 03:27 pm

Re: [ANSI] Re: [ANSI] Trump o
By: halian to Gamgee on Fri Aug 09 2024 04:20 pm

The best solution (seriously) is Nuclear, and has been for decades.

I respectfully disagree that it's the *best* solution, on the grounds that the waste has to be dealt with for a disproportionately long time after it's generated. But it *is* a better solution than fossil fuels.

Nuclear is great because a lot of waste can be recycled for making weapons of mass destruction, which is something superpowers love, apparently.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

Actually Nuclear energy is pretty clean. Unless you're as careful as the USSR when they blew up Chernobyl. But, guess what? Fusion is a reality now! Yes, it's not practical at warming 20 kettles of Tea. but it works! never before achieved. Give it time.

Every technology can be used differently.

Here are a bunch of examples that have both positive and negative uses:

Guns (what if I'm being attacked by a bear? I would want a gun then!!!), Nuclear power is a great example. But let's list things that are older:

Fire
The Spear
Any weapon ever made, including swords and guns. Maybe not newer tech that only has 1 purpose but mass killing, no not those.
A rock.
A brick.
A plastic bag.

You get the point, well some of you won't but oh well LOL.
---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Nuclear is great because a lot of waste can be recycled for making weapons of mass destruction, which is something superpowers love, apparently.

Reusing the waste is better than having it stuck in a cellar for
centuries. I thought there were methods for the waste to be used for
more energy.

---
þ wcQWK 8.0 ÷ Inland Utopia * iutopia.duckdns.org:2323

Re: [ANSI] Re: [ANSI] Trump o
By: Matthew Munson to ARELOR on Fri Aug 16 2024 11:24 am

Reusing the waste is better than having it stuck in a cellar for
centuries. I thought there were methods for the waste to be used for
more energy.

Yeah, there is a lot of talk abour regenerative nuclear reactors, which is a fancy way of saying they keep chewing through fissible material for longer, splitting the nuclear fuel into smaller atoms than usual nuclear reactors.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Nuclear is great because a lot of waste can be recycled for making weapons of mass destruction, which is something superpowers love, apparently.

Reusing the waste is better than having it stuck in a cellar for
centuries. I thought there were methods for the waste to be used for
more energy.

There are. Last I heard they were still experimental but that was probably
6 or more years ago when I heard that. "Nova" on PBS did an episode about
the technology at that time.


* SLMR 2.1a * Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

There are. Last I heard they were still experimental but that was probably 6 or more years ago when I heard that. "Nova" on PBS did an episode about the technology at that time.

Making the waste not as toxic would be a net positive.
If we want electric vehichles, we need to have nuclear power to be
realistic.

---
þ wcQWK 8.0 ÷ Inland Utopia * iutopia.duckdns.org:2323

There are. Last I heard they were still experimental but that was probably
6 or more years ago when I heard that. "Nova" on PBS did an episode about the technology at that time.

Making the waste not as toxic would be a net positive.
If we want electric vehichles, we need to have nuclear power to be
realistic.

I agree. I am a nuclear power skeptic but the NOVA episode got me
interested in it. If they can use up most all of the radioactivity of the plutonium to make power, that really cuts down on the danger of any waste products.

In that episode, they also covered how there are new reactor types that are more efficient and also can shut themselves down if an out-of-hand reaction
is detected. In Fukashima (sp?) during the Tsumani, part of the problem
was that the control room lost power and they were not able to safely shut
down the reactors. A reactor that can shut itself down is a real plus.


* SLMR 2.1a * Shh! Be vewy qwiet! I'm hunting wuntime ewwows!
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP