nuclear plants

[Wonderboy]

We've got a nasty cultural addiction to energy, pretty much the whole world that is. I'm referencing the "western" world here - people who already have access to 2 vehicles per person, refridgeration, air conditioning, etc. Trying to kick these addictions let alone mentioning them as solutions as opposed to "problems" are a hard pill to swallow. Many feel so entitled to such creature comforts that the idea of not having one or any of them is simply out of the question, and the level of energy production/consumption right now needs to remain the same or increase from now on. This inevitably leads to discussion on nuclear power generation. I see a few people (I won't mention any names because this is getting to be a such a long-winded thread that we could probably fit it with a turbine to supplim... hehe anyway) talking about how "renewable" energy will never fulfill "our" needs, our demands. I think we should speak for ourselves - ECOMOD our lives and not just our vehicles. Do an A/C delete here and there, Drive your energy consumption With Load. There are many mentions and subsequent write-offs of things that only make a tiny difference (like the big icy turbine wing thing) yet we talk about aero mods every day on this forum. Oh, a 3% from your grill block? big deal. I think we of all people should have a different attitude toward this, think outside the box, and do a bunch of little things that end up in BIG savings. I forsee a big shift to local everything. Transmission/transportation of goods, of electricity, of anything is a big energy bottleneck. If you can manage to grow all of your own food for instance, or even half of it, you just saved a crapload of energy, and probably a couple years added on to your life btw. In general we need to slow processes down to get them working more efficiently, just like we slow down in our vehicles. Slow it down and the quality improves, slow it down and the efficiency improves. Let's talk about what we can do ourselves or with our local community as opposed to what "they" should do or what "they" are doing with nuclear plants etc. For the record, I guess I'm okay with nuclear for a while, but as DCB keeps chiming in, it's just going to perpetuate our addiction to the use of incredibly large amounts of energy that we could live without and be more in touch with and appreciate what energy is worth. I think we should think more about things we as individuals, or groups of individuals can do to become independent of nonrenewable energy - I think it's much easier than we think, we're just thinking about the wrong things, thinking about how the rest of society will never conform. Build it any they will come. If we depend on big corporations ("they") to make decisions on what is most energy efficient, they are going to do what is most profitable, NOT what is in our best interest. If there are two or more companies "competing" and "driving innovation" to insure that we're getting the best, that's just two or more companies that have managed to dupe us into thinking they're competing for our best interest when they are both just profiting. Just look at what auto companies are pumping out right now. THIS NEW PIECE OF **** GETS 34MPG! WOW! We know there has been and is better stuff out there, and I wouldn't put it past energy companies with nuclear plants, wind farms, solar farms, etc. to do the same kind of thing - make an artificial efficiency barrier and profit as long as they can before we figure out things just got 4% more efficient and they make money hand over fist for another 20 years just like the auto industry. Sure, not all corporations are the same... but if you sleep with dogs, you get fleas if you know what I'm saying. We need to approach this issue like the independent skeptics we are because automobiles aren't the only things that need to get ecomodded.

[stevey_frac]

Wonderboy, you covered the conservation angle better then I ever could have. Thank you.

To add to your point, I recently purchased a home, brand new, getting built as we speak (I hope anyways... lazy construction workers... grr). A few things I demanded? Hot water recovery, High efficiency windows, and insulation above code. And one of the first things i'm gonna do is blow another foot of insulation into the attic, and bring it up to R-100. I'm probably also going to insulate the basement floor, so it's not always cold in the winter.

We need to live by a mandate to reduce consumption through intelligent choices. What I am affraid of is a 'The Sky is Falling' response, and a knee jerk decision to do something that the economy cannot sustainable afford.

-Steve

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by dcb

A lot of people get confused by the "it makes more fuel than it uses" statement in regards to breeder reactors, but in reality it is doing a bit of alchemy on an existing material.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's doing alchemy, just that it's getting more energy out of the fuel than w/ a once through cycle.

[stevey_frac]

Originally Posted by roflwaffle

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's doing alchemy, just that it's getting more energy out of the fuel than w/ a once through cycle.

They are in fact 'doing alchemy'. By bombarding non-fissile uranium or thorium, they gain a neutron and become fissile.

It's actually pretty damned cool eh? A true breeder reactor, you could supply nothing but non-fissile fuel, and fission would continue anyway! Thus 'making' fuel.

[CobraBall]

Wonderboy, Who decides who gets A/C, two cars, big houses, etc.?

Please tell me it isn't the same people who oversee ConRail, Amtrak or any number of quasi-government companies & the decisions aren't going to be made based on "feelings".

"We need to live by a mandate to reduce consumption through intelligent choices." Let me guess. Could it be the same FRANKly unqualified people who mandated the mortgage crisis or are overseeing GM & telling Bank CEO's "You are making too much money!"

What you are suggesting will result in lawyers making decisions that in the past was made by the "Invisible Hand" (see Adam Smith's 1776 book titled"An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations"

...every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.
Adam Smith and the invisible hand

I just luv the thought of a Tennessee pettifogger living in a 30,000 sq. ft. house or a mid-western bureaucrat who owns a $1.65 million house telling me what I can purchase or own. Such arrogance and hypocrisy is disgusting!

[stevey_frac]

Originally Posted by CobraBall

Wonderboy,
"We need to live by a mandate to reduce consumption through intelligent choices." Let me guess. Could it be the same FRANKly unqualified people who mandated the mortgage crisis or are overseeing GM & telling Bank CEO's "You are making too much money!"

Perhaps I should qualify mandate. I do not mean the government should enforce conservation. What i DO mean, is that I can get economic benefits, If i watch my consumption, and try to conserve. I can do this though monitoring and applying a continual improvement paradigm.

I don't want anyone telling me what I do and do not need, and I don't want the government rationing anything. Market forces have in the past, and will in the future, do more to promote conservation then any law ever will.

-Steve

[bgd73]

Originally Posted by stevey_frac

Perhaps I should qualify mandate. I do not mean the government should enforce conservation. What i DO mean, is that I can get economic benefits, If i watch my consumption, and try to conserve. I can do this though monitoring and applying a continual improvement paradigm.

I don't want anyone telling me what I do and do not need, and I don't want the government rationing anything. Market forces have in the past, and will in the future, do more to promote conservation then any law ever will.

-Steve

It seems you just stated the government isn't yours and the market fixes conservative. Exactly backwards today.You not notice a carpocalypse and capitilist running for pretentious made cover? law does enforce conservative, espeically by constipating bad market and product. Even in my lifetime the gov't mistakes are learned from. The result of near future now ought to be interesting. I recently read an article of the facts of global warming, The facts. read by gov't. Peoples integrity gathering. Law is necessary, it is ours.
Unlike 1970s gov't approved low compression v8s with a ozone eating eGR valves, the same subject today is in a smarter realm, if it means putting billionared engineers back in thier retarded marketed cages with thier true nickels and dimes of the only learned integrity of thier true worth..this is the scary part of law and markets. USA is finally getting tougher with it.

[stevey_frac]

Originally Posted by bgd73

It seems you just stated the government isn't yours and the market fixes conservative. Exactly backwards today.You not notice a carpocalypse and capitilist running for pretentious made cover? law does enforce conservative, espeically by constipating bad market and product. Even in my lifetime the gov't mistakes are learned from. The result of near future now ought to be interesting. I recently read an article of the facts of global warming, The facts. read by gov't. Peoples integrity gathering. Law is necessary, it is ours.
Unlike 1970s gov't approved low compression v8s with a ozone eating eGR valves, the same subject today is in a smarter realm, if it means putting billionared engineers back in thier retarded marketed cages with thier true nickels and dimes of the only learned integrity of thier true worth..this is the scary part of law and markets. USA is finally getting tougher with it.

High gas prices have driven more people to drive smaller more fuel efficient vehicles, and have done more to get companies to deliver them, then any government regulation has done to date. That would be a market force.


I'm not even sure how to interpret a lot of what you've written. Please clarify yourself before I attempt to answer you.

[stevey_frac]

Originally Posted by CobraBall

Wonderboy, Who decides who gets A/C, two cars, big houses, etc.?

Please tell me it isn't the same people who oversee ConRail, Amtrak or any number of quasi-government companies & the decisions aren't going to be made based on "feelings".

"We need to live by a mandate to reduce consumption through intelligent choices." Let me guess. Could it be the same FRANKly unqualified people who mandated the mortgage crisis or are overseeing GM & telling Bank CEO's "You are making too much money!"

What you are suggesting will result in lawyers making decisions that in the past was made by the "Invisible Hand" (see Adam Smith's 1776 book titled"An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations"

...every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.
Adam Smith and the invisible hand

I just luv the thought of a Tennessee pettifogger living in a 30,000 sq. ft. house or a mid-western bureaucrat who owns a $1.65 million house telling me what I can purchase or own. Such arrogance and hypocrisy is disgusting!

Upon re-reading this. I whole-heartedly agree with this post. Do not allow lawyers and lawmakers to decide decisions that are best made by 'the invisible hand'.

My 'mandate' was not a government mandate, but a personal one, to reduce consumption. Put into the point of view of this point, i would say, I am driven to conserve because to conserve is to have more, and subsequently be able to consume more of other things.

If i spend less money on gas for instance, or electricity, I have more money to say, go out to the movies, or eat out at a restaurant, or buy ice cream.

-Steve

[jamesqf]

And don't feed me any crap that the market doesn't work. The market has to work, unless the government is going to tell you exactly which car to buy. The SUV bubble was made because of the decisions of the north american public. We decided to buy very expensive huge vehicles with overpowered V8 engines, that were very profitible to sell. And we did so in droves.

Problem is, that ain't exactly so :-) What happened was that the automakers (for a lot of reasons, including getting around a bunch of regulations) decided to build SUVs. Then they spent a lot of money on advertising to convince a small part of the driving public to buy them. (Remember the line about how you can fool some of the people all the time...) But most of the North American public in fact didn't buy them: they bought smaller, more efficient Japanese and European cars instead. The Big Three were two self-important to pay attention to this market signal, and so their market share kept getting smaller & smaller. Now two of them are bankrupt, and the third would be if it hadn't pawned everything it could.