Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Trying really hard... (Score 1) 275

We need to use only 0 emissions energy in the US, We need to implement only new generation IV nuclear reactors, Wind, Solar, we must convert ALL Coal fire plants from to safe LFTR reactors (1.6 Trillion in capital cost) [rawcell.com], we must recycle all plastic wastes (for the environment sake) and make money at it and produce the fuel for our cars at the same time and increase dramatically the fuel efficiency of the vehicles coming off the assembly line( not impossible we can improve it, we have done it with test vehicles), and we must Institute a System of Air Carbon Capture. We can do this with the money made from recycling. We waste 37 million tons of plastic each year in the US ALONE. Worldwide the numbers are huge. That doesn't even get into the fact that sorting out the plastic pays a large portion of the sorting costs of the rest of the trash which can also be recycled. The world produces 500,000,000 tons of waste each year. A large portion of which is plastics. Recycling Waste Can Pay for Air Carbon Capture and for LFTR Capital Conversion Costs! This money would help with the research and development associated with other energy solutions. It would Cost 1.6 Trillion to convert all Coal fire plants to LFTR reactors. I have crunched the numbers. India Will Have its' First 500 MW Thorium Reactor Next Year. With a Manhattan style project we would be able to solve the problems with Thorium reactors in probably less time than it took to do the Manhattan project (4 years) for less than the 23 billion it would take in today's dollars for that project to be completed. The remaining problem with Thorium reactors is the material for the inner containers, and several solutions have been proposed including replacement modules like car oil filters. After that we should FREELY export our technology to the world which benefits us as well as other nations or as trade for debt to other countries.

Comment The Solution is Clear (Score 1) 275

We need to use only 0 emissions energy in the US, We need to implement only new generation IV nuclear reactors, Wind, Solar, we must convert ALL Coal fire plants from to safe LFTR reactors (1.6 Trillion in capital cost), we must recycle all plastic wastes (for the environment sake) and make money at it and produce the fuel for our cars at the same time and increase dramatically the fuel efficiency of the vehicles coming off the assembly line( not impossible we can improve it, we have done it with test vehicles), and we must Institute a System of Air Carbon Capture. We can do this with the money made from recycling. We waste 37 million tons of plastic each year in the US ALONE. Worldwide the numbers are huge. That doesn't even get into the fact that sorting out the plastic pays a large portion of the sorting costs of the rest of the trash which can also be recycled. The world produces 500,000,000 tons of waste each year. A large portion of which is plastics. Recycling Waste Can Pay for Air Carbon Capture and for LFTR Capital Conversion Costs! This money would help with the research and development associated with other energy solutions. It would Cost 1.6 Trillion to convert all Coal fire plants to LFTR reactors. I have crunched the numbers. India Will Have its' First 500 MW Thorium Reactor Next Year. With a Manhattan style project we would be able to solve the problems with Thorium reactors in probably less time than it took to do the Manhattan project (4 years) for less than the 23 billion it would take in today's dollars for that project to be completed. The remaining problem with Thorium reactors is the material for the inner containers, and several solutions have been proposed including replacement modules like car oil filters. After that we should FREELY export our technology to the world which benefits us as well as other nations or as trade for debt to other countries.

Comment Clean water is going to become a huge problem. (Score 3, Informative) 116

We have been polluting the water ever since the industrial age began and draining the water supply at the same time. Aquifers are getting depleted, its going to become an expensive problem. It is good to see this technology finally come about . It should help us bring water to arid lands. They say that with global warming it isn't the heat that is going to affect the plant life but the lack of water supply. It is an expensive proposition however to lay thousands of miles of pipe. But perhaps it will become cheap enough to take and desalinate water and fill up major rivers so that natural distribution can be restored. It would take a lot of energy to do it but with the two orders of magnitude cheaper maybe it would be cost effective? I would also suggest that we stop polluting the water with all the plastics and use it to recycle. We produce 37,000,000 tons of plastic each year that ends up in landfills and in the water. We could convert this into fuel energy. I have done a cost analysis on the energy from plastic recycling.

Comment Re:Someone should do this coal power (Score 1) 482

It reminds me of the Dr. House episode where everyone on the plane develops symptoms because a person comes down with a sickness. In the case of House the person had been scuba diving but they thought it was meningitis. So everyone started developing weird symptoms. This problem has been perpetuated by people that are against any solution that doesn't agree with what they want. The same thing happened with LFTR reactors back in 1942 when they were first suggested and continued later on when nuclear was given a bad name due to the poor technological nuclear solutions selected. If it wasn't for interest groups we would have no nuclear melt downs. No global warming and we would have abundant energy. We can still produce this energy solution for relatively cheap. It isn't too late! I even have a way to pay for the energy solution!
China

Submission + - China hacks into DRDO (domain-b.com) 1

darkstar019 writes: As Chinese hackers have hacked into India's DRDO(Defence Research & Development Organisation), it raises serious questions into whether the hackers are competent enough or are the DRDO officials foolish enough to put the blame on Chinese pen-drives as they say.
Given the reservation policy in place for all government posts in India, one can only speculate the latter to be the source of this latest breach.

Security

Submission + - MIT crypto experts win 2012 Turing Award ("Nobel Prize in Computing") (networkworld.com)

alphadogg writes: A pair of MIT professors and security researchers whose work paved the way for modern cryptography have been named winners of the 2012 A.M. Turing Award, also known as the “Nobel Prize in Computing.” Shafi Goldwasser, the RSA Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT and a professor at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, and Silvio Micali, the MIT Ford Professor of Engineering, are recipients of the award, which will be formerly presented by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) http://amturing.acm.org/byyear.cfm on June 15 in San Francisco. According to the ACM: “By formalizing the concept that cryptographic security had to be computational rather than absolute, they created mathematical structures that turned cryptography from an art into a science." Goldwasser and Micali will split a $250K prize.

Comment Berryllium Not Necessary for LFTR's (Score 1) 416

It is also possible to operate without beryllium fluoride in the salt. It is possible to operate on lithium fluoride-thorium fluoride eutectic without beryllium, as the French LFTR design, the "TMSR", has chosen. Also as far as Zirconium, LFTR's create Zirconium during their burning process as a byproduct. Fission of 1000 kg U-233 produces several chemicals essential for industry, readily extracted from a LFTR, including 150kg xenon, 125kg neodymium (high-strength magnets), 20kg medical molybdenum-99, 20kg radiostrontium, zirconium, rhodium, ruthenium, and palladium. Don't take my word for it. There is NO shortage of natural resources. Sufficient other natural resources such as beryllium, lithium, nickel and molybdenum are available to build thousands of LFTRs. see Wikipedia. http://rawcell.com

Comment Re:Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 1) 416

I responded to this but don't know what happened to the response I posted. So here it is again. Workable designs for trains, houses, and ships have been done. They simply bury a preset amount of liquid salts in containers sixty feet bellow ground in sealed containers. There are companies working on just such designs that I have read about. As far as powering cars, using electric from a grid supplied by Thorium power would work. There was actually a Slashdot article about Cadillac producing a Thorium powered prototype car that would not need refueling for 100k miles. They designed it to run on 8 grams of Thorium. It is not yet a workable design due to neutron flux dampening limitations on current materials that would encase the reactor. Investment similar to the investments that we underwent during the Manhattan project (23 billion in today's dollars) would probably be able to solve this problem through the development of highly engineered containment materials that are sufficiently lite and non-bulky with long enough working life. Thorium Power Articles.

Comment Re:Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 1) 416

dbill: I want to take a few moments to respond. The first full scale LFTR Reactor will come online next year. It is going to be a fully function 500MWe reactor. It is located in India. Six more will follow in the few years after that are for commercial use. It is a cheap nuclear solution because of it's inherent safety. It is also a cheap solution because if it is used to convert the coal fire plants, it actually extends the life of those plants. I will point you to my latest article posting which I am hoping slashdot will also run. India's First Full Scale Reactor

Comment Re:Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 1) 416

As pointed out in the article, the coal industry has made huge amounts of money from Oil, gas, and plastics production. It can not make that kind of money from Thorium because unlike conventional nuclear reactors, there isn't a lot of money to be made in maintenance of the LFTR reactors. It's an almost set and forget design compared with conventional reactors and the fuel is so power dense it doesn't make money from mining it either. Four guys with shovels can unearth enough Thorium from the Thorium rich deposits to provide the energy needs of the US for a day. It doesn't have the huge long term money making machine that other energy sources have. It extends the life from 25 to 80 years for existing coal fire plants. Perhaps even out to 100 years by some estimates. That's a life multiplication of 3 times or 4 times. In the long run it is actually cheaper than oil. Ulterior Motives.

Comment Re:Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 0) 416

What PR agency are you referring to? I have worked out the numbers. I have done thorough research on the subject. PR doesn't fall into this equation. Please back up your PR statement with some facts. To see my facts please go to http://rawcell.com I have diligently laid out my case for the conversion of the coal fire plants to LFTR reactors. If you find a problem with my math or logic, then please spell it out. Don't just make blatantly vague statements with no support of facts. If you have a site where you have laid out your facts, then point me there.

Comment Re:Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 1) 416

LFTR Reactors don't heat houses? So coal fire plants don't heat houses? Several plans for powering ships with LFTR reactors have been made. Same with trains. Don't support decreased load on system? Can you give me any scientific numbers? You are wrong! This isn't a conventional nuclear solution. They dynamics are totally different!

Submission + - Due to Ulterior Motives: The Energy Solution Ignored Since 1942' (rawcell.com)

wanfuse123 writes: "First there was fire, then there was human and animal power, then there was coal and oil. By 1932’ we had discovered the power of the atom. By 1942' a solution to our energy problems had made it to the design phase. In the race for power and control, we forgot the peaceful applications of energy that could be produced from the power of the atom. It was a solution that could power the world for a thousand years. Soon after, we fired its brilliant science advocates and completely buried the solution. Today, I am telling the story of this energy solution in the hopes that the Slashdot crowd can change our energy policy! Here it is, Due to Ulterior Motives: The Energy Solution Ignored Since 1942’."

Comment Solution that can make all sides happy (Score 4, Interesting) 416

Convert all coal fire plants to LFTR Nuclear reactors. It will end up being as cheap as coal, even cheaper in the long run when you account for longevity of the converted plants which will increase the age from 25 years to 80 years. Stop worrying so much about feeling bad over whether its man mad or not, really who cares, the fact is as a species we should care about what makes our species have the most prosperous environment to live in. Forget for a moment about every other species on the planet. Let's be selfish, worry about us. Convert the plants to LFTR reactors get 1000 years of the most power dense, low waste solution while we have it available. Doesn't pollute large areas of land (one mountain pass has enough Thorium to last us 1000 years at 100% of US consumption for everything...every last Watt we use! Has less than .01 % waste that only lasts for 300 years and it consumes the long term waste at the same time. The power density of Thorium is a 1,000,000 ...thats 1 million times the power density of coal. It has none of the draw backs of other alternate energies and the nuclear reactors made with liquid salts can NOT melt down...That is no Fukushima, NO Chernobyl No Three Mile Island. IT is in no way possible with these reactors. It is a clean solution and doesn't pollute and like other alternative energies it works 24 hours a day. I have even worked out a method to pay for it, that only has a 1 year investment associated with it. COAL to LFTR
NASA

Submission + - Cloud computing's big debt to NASA (computerworld.com)

dcblogs writes: IBM's announcement this week that it would base its cloud services on OpenStack may help establish the open-source platform as the standard in enterprises. IBM along with Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Cisco, Red Hat and Rackspace, which helped developed the platform, are supporting OpenStack. This means that just about every Fortune 1000 company will be using vendors that are building products and services based on the OpenStack-based cloud platform. Considering that OpenStack is less than three years old, this may be remarkable. But the rapid rise of OpenStack may not have happened without NASA. That may be worth noting, especially in a time of government sequesters, budget cutting and retreat on R&D spending. "If it were not for NASA, OpenStack would not exist," said Linda Cureton, NASA's CIO.

Slashdot Top Deals

I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.

Working...