This comment is simply not true. Long-lived minor actinide/fission product waste transmutation can be accomplished in an energy-producing power reactor.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
The link goes to information about proposed accelerator driven subcritical reactors, but you can transmute plutonium, minor actinides, and fission products in sodium fast reactors (SFRs) or light water reactors with inert matrix fuel (LWRs). SFRs have nearly the same spectrum neutron energy spectrum as most proposed ADS blankets, and the technology readiness level is much higher. Basically anything you can do in an ADS you can do in an SFR, but you don't have the added cost of an accelerator. Moderated targets would be required for fission product transmutation.
Passive decay heat removal is necessary whether you are talking about an ADS or an SFR. Other than the worst reactivity insertion accidents (which can be mitigated by negative reactivity coefficients) I do not see serious benefits to an ADS over an SFR.
For the 2011 macbook pros, my guess is that this mostly impacts the AMD Radeon HD 6750M and AMD Radeon HD 6770M.
I would imagine the AMD Radeon HD 6490M doesn't get hot enough to be impacted
Some early/late 2011 refurbs have been popping up on the Apple Refurb Store occasionally still (although there are none on there now there was some several weeks ago). My guess is these are machines Apple is replacing for folks with AppleCare and then they are replacing the logic board and battery and reselling them as refurbs.
I have a late 2011 (a work machine with applecare) and have never seen any issues.
Global warming is exactly that- a global trend, not a local one. Locally, the effects have been most pronounced near the north pole, which is not exactly a place where many people live.
Global climate change seems to have resulted recently in a "warming" trend, but as we know from Al Gore's movie, if the North Atlantic current gets shut off we are in for a polar vortex on a much longer time scale.
I am not sure who coined the phrase "global warming"; is it a PR failure by the scientists involved or a reporting failure by the news media? To quote a well known meme: "why not both?"
He said 'short term'
Current reactors don't do that. If you power a reactor a bit down it gets difficult to power it up again, due to different characteristics of moderation (waste products).
The difficulty is due to xenon, which can limit the magnitude of the load follow. However, trust me there are reactors that can follow. History of load following reactors from the American Nuclear Society
Although wind power does not contribute to global warming through greenhouse gas emission, it does extract kinetic energy from the atmosphere and therefore may alter global climate even at continental scales
It may be the lesser of evils compared to some other supplemental energy options but it isn't perfect- and it isn't a good candidate for base load
Load following nuclear plants are possible and many designs (such as the PBMR) are intended to follow load. This is patently false
On a daily basis, December was a month of extremes for Germany, with day-ahead base prices closing on December 10 and 11 at less than €60/MWh – the highest over-the-counter levels seen all year – only to fall to its lowest level December 24 to €0.50/MWh.
I have seen a nice bumper sticker before: Solar and wind are allright, but nuke's do it all night.
I agree with this sentiment. Shame Germany is phasing out nuclear in favor of coal.
The dark matter ring is merely a hypothesis. In my field (or science, engineering, or mathematics generally) we should follow the scientific method when reporting results at a meeting.
This guy was unfortunately presenting a hypothesis. He should have waited and tried to find more compelling evidence before presenting. New Scientist should be familiar enough with the scientific method to avoid publicizing a radical and unproven hypothesis.
The only thing is, they're not.
Taken as a whole, Asimov's vision for 2014 is wildly off. It's more that 'Genius predicted the future 50 years ago' makes for a great article hook. Asimov does hit a couple pretty close to home: He got pretty close to guessing the world population (6.5 billion); he anticipated automated cars ("vehicles with 'robot brains'"); and he seems to have described the current smartphone/tablet craze ("sight-sound" telephones that "can be used not only to see the people you call but also for studying documents and photographs and reading passages from books.")"
Link to Original Source
Since it's discovery in 2004 by two Russian scientists Andrei Geim and Kostya Novoselov, Graphene research has grown leaps and bounds in all direction.
In Asia, countries are competing against each others in committing resource and talents into Graphene. In the tiny island state of Singapore, for example, about half a billion dollar worth of resources have been invested to facilitate the R&D of Graphene. South Korea has reportedly invested more than 2 Billion for Graphene research. Other countries such as Japan, China, Taiwan, and India have also joined the fray, in hot pursuit for the wonder material.
Link to Original Source
I don't really agree with most of this comment- but I do agree he should have kept them with him.
Wife and I learned the hard way when we had a bunched of stuff stolen out of our luggage flying from ORD to IST- if something has monetary and/or sentimental value, always keep it with you.
Turkish airlines sent us $100 check for the $500+ stuff that was stolen.
Excess energy on the grid is a real issue, especially if there has been a significant wave of people adopting these systems. If there isn't demand for all the electricity being pumped onto the grid, there has to be a place to dump the energy. This is an even bigger issue with wind and other intermittent sources.
If the grid is overwhelmed and there is no demand, should folks expect to get paid for that energy, which could actually cost the utility money to dump somewhere?
Something else to bear in mind- the utility has to operate base load plants no matter what.
Recent literature indicates that these issues can be overcome (one example from Utilities Policy ), but that the process will take time. Utilities are a very conservative industry and are often slow to adapt new systems because they have stringent boundary conditions.
Just playing the devils advocate here- I'm sure profit is a part of it.
I know this is a joke- but at least in those cases you can choose whether to use the companies products or make informed decisions that will protect your privacy. Facebook is optional- making phone calls is not.