Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Regarding cooling, coal more energy dense (Score 1) 645

And quoting that abstract:

Using a coupled hydrological-electricity modelling framework with data on 24,515 hydropower and 1,427 thermoelectric power plants, we show reductions in usable capacity for 61-74% of the hydropower plants and 81-86% of the thermoelectric power plants worldwide for 2040-2069. However, adaptation options such as increased plant efficiencies, replacement of cooling system types and fuel switches are effective alternatives to reduce the assessed vulnerability to changing climate and freshwater resources. Transitions in the electricity sector with a stronger focus on adaptation, in addition to mitigation, are thus highly recommended to sustain water-energy security in the coming decades.

I do not think this study does what you want it to.

Comment Re:But in the here-and-now (Score 1) 645

This truly awesome:

In my opinion, the most daring and successful progressive accomplishments lead to the most enduring conservative periods. Conversion to solar power may be as large a step as Plato's invention of a republic. It may leave technical people with little to do. Bread and circuses may be back for a long stay.

I may need to make that my sig quote.

(Slashdot featured a story by this guy, huh?)

Comment Re:Regarding cooling, coal more energy dense (Score 1) 645

The full life-cycle GHG emissions of nuclear power is extremely low, comparable to wind and solar. Check this figure from the IPCC: Read the wikipedia write-up: I wrote about this a while back using a WNA meta-study: There's this persistent myth among the anti-nuclear greens that nuclear power is a big CO2 emitter, but it's based on cherry-picking some discredited studies and ignoring anything that contradicts what you want to believe. This is really no better than the way the global warming denialists rely on minor figures like Singer and Seitz.

Comment Re:Regarding cooling, coal more energy dense (Score 1) 645

By the way: the cooling under discussion has to do with how the plant as a whole transfers heat to its environment. Yes, it can be done without a cold water source (e.g. with big cooling towers, you can air cool the plant), but there are reasons you'd rather use water.

The way heat is transferred inside of the main reactor loop also involves a choice of coolant, and it could be water, steam, molten salt, etc, but this issue has nothing to do with how plants exchange heat with the environment.

Comment Re:Regarding cooling, coal more energy dense (Score 1) 645

You are being dense now. Gas plants are 60% efficient, coal, 40, and nukes 30.

What the hell kind of efficiency are you talking about? Coal plants are really efficient at spewing GHG, and the natural gas industry is only a little better. Even if you really understood something about thermal efficiency (you clearly don't) you'd go with nukes rather than your "more efficient" gas and coal, because nuclear's GHG emissions are down near zero (full life cycle numbers are better for nukes than solar: you know that, right?).

Anyway, maximum thermal efficiency (web search: "Carnot Cycle") is one minus the high temperature over the low temperature. It's no different for coal or for nukes.

There's a kernel of truth in the notion that efficiency declines when the temperature of your cold sink goes up, but the idea that nuclear is the only power source constrained by thermodynamics is completely crazy. (websearch: "charge carrier recombination").

Comment Re:Regarding cooling, coal more energy dense (Score 1) 645

"I guess not. It has something vague to do with cooling of nuclear power plants, google is your friend, so I can spare me citations for what is considered 'common knowledge' here in my world ...."

Your world is a strange bubble reality in which the IPCC has seemingly missed that nuclear power doesn't work in the summer time.

By the way, the efficiency of solar power panels decline at higher temperatures. Strangely enough, thermodynamics applies to all power sources.

Comment Disco (Score 1) 296

Look, I am a lifelong classical music snob, and like a lot of jazz as well (especially the more modern jazz pianists and the new Japanese jazzists)... but I think also that disco was at least OK.

But how old are you? Disco was being pushed down our throats by major media (seriously, no news broadcast was completely without a "how To Do The Hustle" fluff piece), it had a culture based on expensive clothes far out of the reach of any teenager, not to mention the heavy cocaine use. The big disco venue was Studio 54, which was famous for being Exclusive, if you weren't a Big Star good luck getting in the door. And no one liked the music, the record companies lost their shirts pushing disco records. This entire business sucked, the suckiness of the music was just a small part of it.

Disco is why punk was necessary.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to treat everything as if it were a nail." -- Abraham Maslow