Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: The premise -- collectivism (Score 4, Insightful) 317

by Mr.CRC (#49297853) Attached to: Fake Suicide Attempt Tests Facebook Prevention Tool, Lands Man In Asylum

is of course, that you do not own your existence. So if you "threaten" suicide, you may be forced to continue living.

I predict that there will be very little overall objection to this premise in the discussion that follows, as the present culture is rapidly converging toward the complete realization of the nightmare "the personal is the political" in which every aspect of everyone's life is going to be everyone else's business. With the individual a bit player.

Exist, dammit, or we'll put you in prison!

Comment: Re:Yes. What do you lose? But talk to lawyer first (Score 4, Interesting) 734

by Mr.CRC (#49193033) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Should I Let My Kids Become American Citizens?

It's more than just tax paperwork. There are asset declaration forms to send to Treasury Dept. Failure to file these can result in prison sentences.

The situation is MUCH more complex than just having to do a 1040 like everyone else in the US. Furthermore, there are regulations the US gov. is enacting which affect how international wire transfers are handled by banks, which is forced upon any bank that has a branch in the US. These regs. can cause you to automatically loose "witholding" taxes on transfered amounts, and then have to go through an ordeal to get the money back if it isn't justified by your overall tax picture.

Finally, the US .gov will happily pass new laws that create new reporting obligations that they will do very little to warn people about. Ie., don't expect a highway billboard to warn you of new reporting obligations. So unless you are proactive about determining whether the legal landscape has changed, you may find yourself out of compliance with some new rules that almost no one knows about, where failure to comply entails possible prison sentences.

They are not nice people creating these rules. Conduct yourself under the US global empire accordingly, if you wish to stay out of trouble!

Note that some of these rules get sold to the public by capitalizing on the resentment toward the "1%." But then what actually happens is that it's the normal people who are most at risk of getting penalized since we don't have tax attorneys constantly monitoring the legal landscape, unlike rich people. So once again, if you cheer on the .gov when it claims it's going to "help" you by giving the shaft to "the rich," unless you are an IDIOT you should know damn well that if you go along with it you are being played for a fool, just as it's always been.

Comment: Re:Fuck it - everyone for themselves. (Score 2) 374

by Mr.CRC (#49133913) Attached to: The Groups Behind Making Distributed Solar Power Harder To Adopt


Nearly all power transfer in the electrical grid is via completely passive transformers. There is no "one way" capability to AC transformers. If you are delivering power then it is being distributed proportionally to all other users, minus link losses. The only exception may be HVDC systems, in which power transfer may be unidirectional or bidirectional depending on the design.

Comment: Re:A precaution when done ahead of time. (Score 1) 311

by Mr.CRC (#49069147) Attached to: Nuclear Plant Taken Down In Anticipation of Snowstorm

I don't buy this The generators have electrically excited field windings. Take down the exciter fields, and there is no electrical power output.

Generator fields can be taken down in milliseconds. A resistor to dump the inductive energy stored is of manageable size, vs. a resistor to load the entire generator output for a long period. Once you drop the exciter fields, you have a mechanically unloaded steam turbine, which still presents a risk of over speed.

SCRAM takes a few seconds, so the thermal output of the reaction can be halted in this time. But there is stored heat from the reaction left in the core. Plus, there is still power output, equivalent to the initial value of the decay heat release rate, typically about 7% of total thermal power output.

It may take a few minutes, or at best a few 10s of seconds to actuate a steam valve of the massive size which controls the turbine feed. Presumably there is an alternate path to divert this steam, such as to additional heat exchangers in the cooling towers, right?

What I anticipate would be done if the grid tie were severed, is that instead of completely cutting generation, within a few milliseconds the exciter field may be ramped down to reduce power output to 10-20% or so, while a resistor (of more manageable size vs. one able to take full power) is switched in. Mechanical braking can also be applied, to consume another 10-20% of the turbine power. Now you are not completely unloaded, but still under-loaded 60-80%.

The problem now consists of a transient turbine speed rise then decay to stop, based on the competing dynamics of combined partial braking and power dumping working against the time it takes to divert the steam. I would expect that this control problem has been designed and validation tested to death for any plant. But I am speculating a bit here (not about the generator field, but about how the power take down is accomplished. So, since you asserted that:

"power that gets generated has to go somewhere, which is the power grid. If the nuclear power plant's connection to the grid gets severed (by bad weather, in this case), the power still has to go somewhere, or else it melts down the connecting infrastructure, and eventually triggers a nuclear meltdown situation."

Then please explain why the situation as I anticipate it is incorrect, and things will go all to hell anyway?

The best way to accelerate a Macintoy is at 9.8 meters per second per second.