hairytrog

12 ms·

61.
by hairytrog 6y ago
100 kW may make sense but as part of a large facility with maybe a few hundred of them. Distributing nuclear material so widely would be imprudent. The materials themselves are dangerous, there's no getting around that and there's
62.
by hairytrog 6y ago
If renewables growth continues and expands (as in the multi Trillion Green Deal lol), different nuclear thrusts will probably not require any government assistance or support. The money making potential will completely outweigh any other co
63.
by hairytrog 6y ago
The battery/solar/storage costs are near material costs already. And the material costs are artificially low. If you wanted to scale up production to match demand, prices will have to increase so that mines can extract worse ores
64.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Let's not get stuck into one solution. Need to pursue several. Floating power plants are very promising as there is lots of shipbuilding capability and the worldwide commercial cargo fleet numbers in the tens of thousands of ships. Th
65.
by hairytrog 6y ago
The machine never slows down to protect weaker species. Such plan may be an attempt to lower power demand at night and make the demand curve more closely match Germany's wind/solar supply curve. It's an effort to lower costs
66.
Antitrust Can’t Bust a Monopoly of Ideas(wsj.com)
1 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
67.
by hairytrog 6y ago
There are drawbacks to such a universal search system as described. The search is often crucial to the development of ideas. Like going to a library looking for a book, and finding a bunch of books on the same shelf or two shelfs over. You
68.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Solution: 10% tax on all satellite internet revenues to fund space based telescopes. Could really improve astronomy.
69.
Gold vs. Salmon(nytimes.com)
1 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
70.
3-D Printed Stellarator(typeoneenergy.com)
2 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
71.
by hairytrog 6y ago
I wonder what goes through the whistleblowers head in terms of timing and how much they should help the crime. If you wait a little longer or help the crime, the payout increases. Maybe there are already people designing schemes in which th
72.
Democrats’ New Climate Plan Will Kill Endangered Species, Environmentalists Fear(forbes.com)
3 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
73.
On Behalf of Environmentalists, I Apologize for the Climate Scare(forbes.com)
8 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
74.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Who's paying for HN?
75.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Curing disease is not likely to make more money. Carbon-free energy: nuclear, storage?? Self-driving cars: just keep throwing money at it, eventually something will cross the threshold of good enough
76.
A Twitter Mob Takes Down an Administrator at Michigan State(wsj.com)
2 points by hairytrog 6y ago|0 comments
77.
by hairytrog 6y ago
NASA is developing its own system: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/201700... . It's expected to follow a similar industry bidding process as the commercial crew launch etc. It's
78.
by hairytrog 6y ago
It's not a dirty bomb! The nuclear thermal rocket has not operated yet which means the fuel is not radioactive and contains no fission products. The surface to space chemical rocket could explore and there would be no fall out.
79.
by hairytrog 6y ago
The winnowing theory only makes sense to people today, because we have such a massive demolition industry. But when things were built with old construction techniques, taking a lot more time and effort, using stone and brick - you built onc
80.
by hairytrog 6y ago
I think I came out a little strong and biased here. My apologies. Some more thoughts on this article. - They group nukes in the clean %, so today we're at 37% clean already. not bad. Going to higher clean % with mix of wind/solar
81.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Short answer: anything above 20% is unproven and will cost significantly more if you expect to have 100% uptime/reliability. If you're okay with 95% uptime, wind/solar can get the job done, and I believe cheaper based on htt
82.
by hairytrog 6y ago
since hydro is basically constant, any analysis can just subtract it from the total demand. the dynamic analysis can proceed without considering hydro.
83.
by hairytrog 6y ago
it's just difficult to coordinate all these things top down and there's a bunch of extra infrastructure and IT, and more regulation and rules and complexity. People telling you when you can and can't do things, etc. Eh. Seems
84.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Drop what to 80%? Our economy works really well because electricity is 100% dispatchable. You flip the switch at any time, things work. If you go below that, the economy will follow the weather, which I guess is just a different way to oper
85.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Something else I really like: flipping the switch and seeing things turn on. Regarding the immense capacity required for wind/solar: see Figure 10 of https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii&
86.
by hairytrog 6y ago
too true for most nuclear projects out there.
87.
by hairytrog 6y ago
You can make while society falls around you. You want to make the most efficient use of time, energy, land, and materials. Why? So you can do more with it, give more people more time to think about things unrelated to survival, so you can s
88.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Exciting. But here are some problems. - Unfortunately, they are averaging the entire US, which is made of several grids, so the bad days are not that bad in their analysis. To fix those bad days, you'd need hella more storage, hella mo
89.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Well noted. Here's a paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03605... The energy returned on invested, EROI, has been evaluated for typical power plants representing wind energ
90.
by hairytrog 6y ago
Lots of downvotes on my comment. A somewhat hilarious denial of what is plainly visible. Did you people even read the linked summary? The economy was hijacked for a complete non-threat, driven by increasingly discredited studies, "expe

More ›