Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

441 - 455 of 455 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
Donald, your point was TRIGA reactors are safe for power production but they can’t use be used for power production and be safe because beyond a certain number of kilowatts of constant use, they are susceptible to loss of coolant accident during station black out. This is caused by the fuel heating up from fission products even when the assembly is subcritical. The more kilowatts of constant use, the more fission products, and the more fission products, the more heating when the reactor is subcritical even after shutdown in an emergency.
Never said that.

I said that nuclear reactors can be completely safe if they, and their fuels, are designed to be completely safe.

TRIGA was an example to prove that principle. Now... go make me one that is good for power production.
Donald, your argument boils down to the assertion that a future unproven nuclear technology will make nuclear electricity production safe on a grand scale, and yet your argument against levitated kinetic storage rings is they rely on unproven technology, despite studies from Argonne national lab providing evidence that they require no technological breakthroughs and are cost competitive with pumped hydro.
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
29,803 Posts
Discussion Starter · #443 ·
Donald, your argument boils down to the assertion that a future unproven nuclear technology will make nuclear electricity production safe on a grand scale, and yet your argument against levitated kinetic storage rings is they rely on unproven technology, despite studies from Argonne national lab providing evidence that they require no technological breakthroughs and are cost competitive with pumped hydro.
Do either. I couldn't give a monkey's. But make something happen.

As per the subject matter of the thread, I took a long look at my real costs and figured on how electricity prices were going, there was flat out no justification on cost to replace my Zoe with another BEV just at the moment. I'm happy with my 80mpg at £6/gal in a car that is £15k lower purchase price than one at 3mi/kWh at 12p/kWh. (The latter, likely to be attracting additional road taxes at some stage, and where the costs on long trips increases by x4.)

I'm not prepared to wait 400,000 miles to see a pay-back on that extra cost. (= £15k/[7.5p/mile - 4p/mile]). I'm currently doing about 5k miles a year, and the chances of me living for another 80 years are slim. About the same chances as a BEV lasting that long.

Now, if the electricity was so cheap it was less than 1p/mile, then all of a sudden there is a payback point after 200,000 miles .. only 40 years. Still probably won't live that long, but I can then feel easier about paying for the additional benefits that come along with BEVs.
 

·
Registered
2018 Nissan Leaf 40kWh Tekna - love it
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
1Mbq/m^2 means one million radionuclide disintegrations are happening each second on each square meter of soil. In the case of cesium-137 contamination, its 30 year half life means this will drop to safe levels after around 200 years.
Look Metastable, you are wrong most of the time and this is no exception. You have been asked to back up your assertions with data regarding the risk of hazard occuring and quantifying the harm as a result. All life on Earth has been exposed to radiation from the appearance of the first living organism and it may be one of the factors which accelerated evolution and led to the eventual development of man. It can cause significant harm, but for the most part it doesn't. Because it can be measured at very low levels it is common to worry about it much more than we do about harmful chemicals which are much harder to detect at the same concentration.
 

·
Registered
2018 Nissan Leaf 40kWh Tekna - love it
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Why not use the technology described in this report from Argonne National Laboratory but replace the nuke plant with cheaper wind / solar?
Because, dear chap, nobody is that stupid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
Do either. I couldn't give a monkey's. But make something happen.

As per the subject matter of the thread, I took a long look at my real costs and figured on how electricity prices were going, there was flat out no justification on cost to replace my Zoe with another BEV just at the moment. I'm happy with my 80mpg at £6/gal in a car that is £15k lower purchase price than one at 3mi/kWh at 12p/kWh. (The latter, likely to be attracting additional road taxes at some stage, and where the costs on long trips increases by x4.)

I'm not prepared to wait 400,000 miles to see a pay-back on that extra cost. (= £15k/[7.5p/mile - 4p/mile]). I'm currently doing about 5k miles a year, and the chances of me living for another 80 years are slim. About the same chances as a BEV lasting that long.

Now, if the electricity was so cheap it was less than 1p/mile, then all of a sudden there is a payback point after 200,000 miles .. only 40 years. Still probably won't live that long, but I can then feel easier about paying for the additional benefits that come along with BEVs.
Donald, I think we’re finally seeing eye to eye—

Electric cars are playthings of the rich who have too much money to spend and are not currently a viable transportation option for the vast majority on a cost breakdown basis.

EAPC’s and escooters are where the true up front cost, operating cost, effort (compared to bicycles) and environmental savings lie. There’s no harm in having a gas car if most time you’re using an EAPC that’s 18x more efficient than an electric car (mi/kWh) because the EAPC use can offset the environmental costs of a small amount of gasoline use, even compared to using an electric car for all journeys.

I use a gas SUV for long work trips (500+ mile) that also often require off-roading to reach the final destination, but I use my electric scooter for practically everything else— getting takeout, going to the gym, small errands, getting home from the mechanic’s, etc…
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
1Mbq/m^2 means one million radionuclide disintegrations are happening each second on each square meter of soil. In the case of cesium-137 contamination, its 30 year half life means this will drop to safe levels after around 200 years.
Look Metastable, you are wrong most of the time and this is no exception. You have been asked to back up your assertions with data regarding the risk of hazard occuring and quantifying the harm as a result. All life on Earth has been exposed to radiation from the appearance of the first living organism and it may be one of the factors which accelerated evolution and led to the eventual development of man. It can cause significant harm, but for the most part it doesn't. Because it can be measured at very low levels it is common to worry about it much more than we do about harmful chemicals which are much harder to detect at the same concentration.
Is that so?

the area exposed to more than 1 megabecquerel per square meter [1MBq/m^2] -- a level that would trigger a relocation order…”



The four airliners stolen would have all done the job I am afraid
I was a radiation Officer in the Forces and have visited all of the nuclear power stations open in the 90s. All military districts are required to have them by law as the forces do have radioactive equipment, so radiation supervisors at unit level report to Radiation officers at District level who report to, this bit is covered by the official secrets act
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts

·
Registered
2018 Nissan Leaf 40kWh Tekna - love it
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Do you truly believe the physicists employed at Argonne National Labs are really just a bunch of crackpots?
Clearly those involved in that 1984 paper are/were. Have they got any backers yet?
 

·
Registered
2018 Nissan Leaf 40kWh Tekna - love it
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Donald, I think we’re finally seeing eye to eye—

Electric cars are playthings of the rich who have too much money to spend and are not currently a viable transportation option for the vast majority on a cost breakdown basis.

EAPC’s and escooters are where the true up front cost, operating cost, effort (compared to bicycles) and environmental savings lie. There’s no harm in having a gas car if most time you’re using an EAPC that’s 18x more efficient than an electric car (mi/kWh) because the EAPC use can offset the environmental costs of a small amount of gasoline use, even compared to using an electric car for all journeys.

I use a gas SUV for long work trips (500+ mile) that also often require off-roading to reach the final destination, but I use my electric scooter for practically everything else— getting takeout, going to the gym, small errands, getting home from the mechanic’s, etc…
Fortunately, Metastable, your exploits do not represent the thinking and actions of most people and governments. People like cars. They are pleasant environments for the driver and passengers who are kept warm and dry on their journeys. We also aspire to reducing airborne pollution, especially in cities. That is the motivation for Electric cars (and busses). Electric scooters are a fashion fad for losers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,126 Posts
I use a gas SUV for long work trips (500+ mile) that also often require off-roading to reach the final destination, but I use my electric scooter for practically everything else— getting takeout, going to the gym, small errands, getting home from the mechanic’s, etc…
You'd travel 499 miles on an electric scooter?
 
441 - 455 of 455 Posts
Top