Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Good! (Score 1) 207

Fukushima was a case of TEPCO not listening to their engineers. Had the sea wall been of the proper height, nothing would have happened.

Chernobyl was the result of shitty maintenance, old, faulty design and the idiots in charge of the facility playing games with the reactor and not communicating it to the next shift.

TMI was the result of poor maintenance. And it still killed NOBODY.

Comment Re:Good! (Score 2, Interesting) 207

1: Actually, politics have almost EVERYTHING to do with it. The entire regulatory environment for nuclear power has been poisoned for most of the last 30-40 years. And the countless lawsuits by the anti-nuke crowd don't do anything to drive costs and timelines down.

The reason why the power industry lobbies for extensions on existing plants is because:

A - Trying to get a truly NEW reactor site developed is like convincing someone to have all their teeth pulled, without painkillers or being knocked out, THROUGH THEIR RECTUM. Getting NRC time simply to look at or discuss plans is prohibitively expensive. AND THAT'S THEIR FUCKING JOB! Getting local, state and federal approval is a tortuously long and painful process, with nuisance lawsuits breeding faster than rabbits.

B - Because of A, most of these power generation companies would have to replace the aging nuclear reactors with things like coal or oil-fired facilities which have their OWN regulatory nightmares.

C - Most can't implement wind farms or solar farms simply because they don't have access to the land assets necessary, and these power assets still cannot be used as base load. Geothermal is out of the picture for most parts of the country as well.

2: This is why you assign accountants to monitor regulators' finances.

Additionally, look at the history of nuclear safety in the US. Total number of people killed by nuclear power generation. ZERO.

3: Yucca Mountain was forced on Nevada by the Feds. On top of that, the flames of NIMBY-ism were fanned by the state officials talking about rolling nuclear waste down the streets of Las Vegas, when anything BUT was going to happen.

While I, personally, don't know if our engineering is up to building a facility capable of holding things safely for 100K+ years, the site is one of the most heavily researched pieces of land on the planet.

And the OP keeps talking about "we", as if there's some sort of unified front for nuclear power. That usually signifies that they're one of the anti-nuke crowd. Meaning THEY don't think humanity should use it, because they don't want to deal with the waste in any meaningful way.

Comment Re:Nuclear research needed! (Score 1) 207

Wind and solar have land use issues, habitat destruction issues and are NOT carbon neutral due to the rare earth mining that is currently offshored because China doesn't give a shit about its environment and wants to keep the RE market cornered.

Burning biomass is problematic due to greenhouse gas issues.

These forms of power are also NOWHERE near as energy-dense as nuclear power is.

A 1TW reactor is a relatively small affair. And most of the facility's land use is comprised of the cooling tower. Even the tower, a fairly large structure, is still a compact affair.

A 1 TW PV SOLAR facility currently doesn't exist. And the largest solar facility in the world, Longyangxia Dam Solar Park, produces 850MW and covers roughly nine square miles.

The largest Solar Thermal facility, Ivanpah, is set to max out around 400MW, and currently uses about 5 square miles, plus it uses a fuck-ton (about 500K metric cubic feet per year on average) of natural gas to pre-heat the facility in the mornings.

Comment Re: 6.8 Billion (Score 1) 207

Yeah, but it's only ONE nuclear plant. One that can be strategically located (like right next to the other nuclear plant on the existing facility). So it's not like they just broke ground in some scenic place and spoiled everything.

Additionally, the land use of a reactor facility and cooling tower is a fraction of the amount of land used in a solar or wind farm.

Comment Re:From the article (Score 5, Funny) 207

Just the sheer amount of deaths per terawatt caused by nuclear power should make people rethink it. Nothing even comes close.

You mean that whopping number of ZERO?

You're right. Pretty much everything out there has a higher death count than nuclear, even when taken individually. So you're right. Nothing even comes close.

Comment Re:6.8 Billion (Score 1) 207

US or Russian naval officers would disagree with you.

See what I wrote above. You can make a reactor of any size. But you lose efficiency - both neutron efficiency and cost efficiency - the more you scale down. Nuclear sub reactors' scaledowns are aided by the use of highly enriched uranium as fuel, something you don't want to do with civilian nuclear plants. And note that even nuclear subs' reactors aren't "small". A Los Angeles class, for example, uses a 165MW reactor. And nuclear power plants, unlike subs, generally need to have multiple reactors so that they can be taken down for maintenance / fueling.

Comment Re:6.8 Billion (Score 2) 207

The GP is correct. Solar farms are a pretty dense energy source - comparable (when the reservoir is included) to all but the highest head dams, and an order of magnitude or two more than a typical dam. And some designs can get even more dense, such as linear fresnel reflectors (which cover a higher percentage of the ground because of less issues with self-shading as the sun moves). Plus, solar can be paired with wind. Wind is a low energy density source with respect to total acreage, but very high with respect to actual surface area required on the ground.

Beyond this, a few notes. Much solar doesn't have to take up any new land at all, as one notes from rooftop solar (ideally industrual/commercial), parking shelters/covered walkways, etc. And places where solar plants are made are most typically desert areas. And there's a curious reversal in the desert when it comes to life: while shading terrain hinders life in moist areas, it encourages life in desert areas. In the desert, places that provide shade (ironwood trees, saguaro cacti, large rocks, etc) tend to turn into oases of life - not simply by providing relief from the blazing sun, but slowing down the rate of water loss from the soil. Now, this doesn't usually happen with solar plants because at this stage, most are kept cleared. But that does not have to be the case.

Comment Re:Not a copyright violation, a Trademark violatio (Score 1) 198

No it's not legitimate if he merely mentioned either. Merely mentioning a trademark doesn't mean you're in violation of trademark law, otherwise you wouldn't be able to talk about most commercial products. The precise restrictions on trademarked word use are best described by a lawyer, but remember the intent of trademark law is to prevent people from passing an item off as something associated with the trademark owner, not to restrict people's ability to talk about products they've seen or owned.

For more information, visit Bing and google "trademarks".

Comment Re:Is that all (Score 1) 307

It's inevitable that a certain fraction of people go off the deep edge. People are irrational, even (or perhaps mostly) people who are convinced they are entirely rational. Rationality is a fragile thing because emotion and confirmation bias are deeply woven into everyone's thinking.

For normal people are few more powerful emotional impulses than the urge to protect children. It should hardly be surprising that children come to harm from it.

Comment Re:About time. (Score 5, Interesting) 307

Medical professionals have a professional duty to state medical facts. If they refuse, they can and should be placed in a different career path.

An accountant or lawyer promoting a Sovereign Citizen view of the relationship between client and state would be struck off. A Bridge Engineer who rejects Newtonian (or better) mechanics would be struck off.

This isn't like banning a doctor from discussing gun safety because you lobbyists are worried it might lead to a decrease in household gun ownership. This is about nurses being required not to mislead people about medicine, abusing their positions as respected medical professionals to sow misinformation. It's not a freedom of speech issue, it's a professionalism issue, and critically it's a life and death issue.

Comment Re:Or... (Score 1) 103

Funny thing is after I lived with the flip phone for a year or so, about a year ago I bought the cheapest smartphone I could ($30, at Walmart!) and was stunned at how much better it was than the GN. OK, the screen was worse, as was the amount of storage -- though the fact it took SD cards mitigated that in part, but it really was faster, smoother, and the UI had less bugs. It resold me on Android.

I honestly don't think price has much to do with device "niceness" in the Android world. Sure, in the early days, you had a few "cheap" phones with sub-WVGA screens that were barely usable, and right until a couple of years ago even the slightly better ones seemed cobbled together, but right now I'm actually seeing low end hardware that's caught up with Android's needs, while critical features continue to get removed from phones as they get more expensive.

And some of those removed features do, actually, make the phone less frustrating. That cheap $30 Walmart special had dedicated navigation buttons for example - its replacement doesn't, meaning I have to swipe from the corners to get buttons that'll close a full screen app or just send that full screen app a "back" signal. How is that an improvement? It isn't. The buttons are removed because it interferes with the lines of the device and would make it fractionally bigger, aesthetic considerations that undermine usability and makes the device more annoying to use.

Slashdot Top Deals

The end of labor is to gain leisure.