Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 09-11-2007

By Gregon

Polly wants…? I bet you read my mind.

Quote of the Day:

I think I can safely say that no one understands quantum mechanics.

Richard Feynman

Greg
Editor
Greg is the owner-editor of The Daily Grail, as well as the author of a number of books including Stop Worrying, There Probably is an Afterlife.
Related

33 Comments

  1. End of Oil – Make it so
    There’s no “end of oil” to panic about, but it is time to become less oil dependent.

    The folks that run the EIA should devote some of their resources to design and standardize several nuclear reactor designs to use in the generation of electricity and/or desalinization. Safety should be the primary consideration. The EIA should then give the designs to the world.

    Windmills, tide-generators, and solar collectors are interesting and sometimes practical, but the bulk of our power generation will require reactors as we become less oil dependent.

    The EIA could also put some money into the development of batteries capable of giving vehicles extended range and speed. A DARPA-like contest might be considered. Using practical electric-powered passenger vehicles would free-up petroleum stock for diesel in transportation and agriculture. Gasoline could be phased-out completely over time. Standard design of vehicle battery-packs could allow a quick exchange at service stations.

    Waste products from energy reactors can now be rendered to be contaminated for hundreds-of-years rather than hundreds-of-thousands-of-years. This makes glass sealing and isolated burial much more practical.

    Bill

  2. Why the heck do they talk so much then…
    Because we think telepathy is a fallacy, so they have to use the good old method.

    Consider this:
    If thoughts are telepathic in nature, why do we use verbal language so much?

    Probably because telepathy can be one sided, think beeper rather than cell phone, and that thought won’t reveal itself unless forced to.

    Why not ask the parrot? He might have something to say on that matter.

  3. The battle for Chichen
    Many of us mexicans knew first about this situation after Chichen Itza was “declared” one of the new seven wonders of the world.

    In an article from the newspaper Reforma, one of the Barbachanos claimed that their grandfather had actually offered to sell the land where the ruins are located to the government years ago, but -and this is the astounding part of the story- the INAH (Natioanl Institute of Antropology) declined the offer. When asked about this, the INAH’s current director refused that version and said the Barbachanos have never showed any intention to sell what it is a very profitable tourist attraction, since the guests on their hotel get a free pass to the ruins.

    This is sickening to me, but on the othr end I don’t know if nationalizing the ruins would do much good either. The vendors would not leave because of this, on the contrary they would probably increase and make Chichen as noisy and polluted as Teotihuacan, with people pestering tourists with their cheap souvenirs.

    On the other hand, we have the problem of Tulum, located in the Mayan Ribiera of Cancun, with greedy investors building exclusive resorts much too close to the ruins, and endangering the cultural heritage of the mexicans.

    A heritage that most mexicans won’t ever have the privilege to visit first-hand themselves 🙁

    Nothing new really. BTW, Did you know our National Anthem has a copyright from an american company, the Broadcasting Music Incorporated (BMI)?????????

    —–
    It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
    It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

    Red Pill Junkie

  4. Sorry Bill.
    But the Glass Sealing in Washington State still has not started up, nor is it know how well it will work. And there is no safe place yet to store radioactive waste(Yucca Mt has been nixed because of fault line). With oil going over 100$ a barrel, solar power will be braking even soon if not already. And In the Pacific Northwest the demand for wind power is outstripping construction.
    For more info on burial of radioactive waste, and sealing see this. Its was updated in 2004, but nothing has change since then.

    http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/ern/02mar/overview.php

    Bill if you have more resent info that supports your view of nuclear power goinng clean, then please forward.

    PS. what kind of mileage does your Rig get?

    1. Nuclear
      Sorry, Bill. Never. Whilst many of your ideas are practical, it begins with nuclear energy. I won’t bother with the safety issues that have not been adequately aired. Rather, I find it intriguing that this is the one so-called non-pollutant energy system that will require the continuance of huge organisation, guaranteeing big business remains king, and keeping smaller businesses out.
      Empire by nuclear energy instead of war.

      …

      I’m fanatical about moderation

      Anthony North

      1. Lots of Hamsters is Big Business
        I have read your comment before and I still don’t understand what you mean.

        Any energy source that produces electricity and transporation for a large population is going to be “big business”. It doesn’t matter if it’s a dam, solar, nuclear, tides, coal, or hamsters in wheels. Whatever it is must produce billions of watts of electricity. That’s a lot of damn hamsters or a lot of coal or whatever. It has big business written all over it.

        Further, I want my energy supplier to have the resources, distribution, maintenance crews, and finances to give me uninterrupted power 24/7. No Mom & Pop ops, thank you. Give me someone I can sue if the fail to provide to the contract

        Bill

        1. Smaller business
          Hi Bill,
          In the UK not many years ago there were about 20 electricity boards providing electric from a national grid. Each board took measures to protect their region’s electricity, and the grid could operate without one or more of the boards if things went wrong. Opened up to ‘competition’ they were swallowed up by big business and now there’s a couple, and most safeguards to protect the regions have gone.
          UK independent TV’s main channel used to be run by over a dozen regional companies, all putting in to a ‘national’ channel. Programming was excellent, coming from many sources. Competition was opened up and big business stepped in. Now there’s one company, and television is, in the main, terrible.
          The smaller companies offered better service, and even had offices you could go to to complain, sue, whatever. Now, big business has closed them all and treat the consumer with utter contempt.
          There’s a big difference in the type of business, depending on the size – in terms of customer service, and adaptation to the particular region. I’d argue they could go even smaller than they used to be by using local and natural resources, still give a good service, contribute to a national system, and be even more accountable to the consumer.

          …

          I’m fanatical about moderation

          Anthony North

          1. No change
            Hi Anthony,

            The electrons don’t know if their mother was uranium or a lump of coal.

            It really doesn’t matter what type of energy is being used to turn those turbines, the distribution process will remain the same. I suggest that the infrastructure is not a function of the method used generate electricity. Why would it be otherwise?

            Bill

          2. Distribution
            Hi Bill,
            The method of distribution may very well remain similar, but efficiency, competitiveness, survivability and adaptability can best be served by being managed, and isolated, more at the smaller, local level.
            Make it too large and lack of accountability to the consumer breeds contempt, ‘efficiency’ stops accounting for surplus, and profit is the only cause.
            Another example. Not generation, but fuel. In the late 1990s a hand full of tanker drivers in the UK brought petrol distribution to a standstill. Big business had become so ‘efficient’ that if the dispute hadn’t been resolved in days, the Army would have had to go in because the country was running out of petrol.
            There was no surplus around the country and too few distribution points. This would not have happened when there were many, smaller companies doing this job.

            …

            I’m fanatical about moderation

            Anthony North

          3. Nuclear power
            Hi Anthony,

            In many parts of the US one can choose from several companies all using the same infrastructure. I am in a rural location so my electricity is provided by a co-op. I had to buy the power lines and poles and pay for the installation.

            I would prefer that the electricity generated come from the safest and least polluting source available. That would be nuclear reactors. Watch the price of oil drop as we build more reactors.

            Bill

          4. Revolving doors
            Hi Bill,
            Have you ever been caught in one of those revolving doors, where you spin along, taking nothing in, and end up where you started?

            …

            The balanced adult retains an inner child

            Anthony North

          5. The Price of Oil will not Drop
            Several reasons. We have Oil men in the White House who are doing all they can to scare the markets into higher prices. With wars and rumors of war. Second the value of the dollar is about 30%-40% less then 6 years ago, so it costs more dollars because of inflation. And demand has not gone down.

          6. Maybe you should have invested in
            Solar panels, or a wind turbine? Then you would have been beholden to no one. And there are tax breaks out there for renewable energy.

      2. I agree Anthony, Why depend on Big Biz
        Their in it for money, not so much for you. Our hot water heater is beggining to go, so I’ve started to look at a solar option. And there is a tax break too! If anyone has any experience with a solar water heater or ideas, let me know!

    2. Nuke ’em
      [quote=bladerunner]But the Glass Sealing in Washington State still has not started up, nor is it know how well it will work.[/quote]

      Vitrification has been around for ten years or so and is used extensively. Vitrification is a proven technique in the disposal and long-term storage of nuclear waste or other hazardous wastes.

      Try to understand that the waste from weapons plants is quite different from the waste of a nuclear power plant. Nuclear waste coming from nuclear weapons plants is made of highly radioactive elements, mainly strontium 90, cesium 137 and plutonium 239 and 240, as well as other less radioactive elements.

      The highly radioactive waste is either extracted by a solution that does not mix with the waste solution – a process called solvent extraction – or is removed by ion exchangers. The high-level wastes are then to be immobilized in a special glass, placed inside steel drums and buried about 1,000 feet deep in salt mines. The remaining low-level waste may then be encased in cement and stored on site at Hanford, Wash., and the Savannah River Site, S.C.

      The DOE has hired a new manager and tasked her to get those glass logs rolling. I agree it’s long overdue.

      [quote=bladerunner] And there is no safe place yet to store radioactive waste(Yucca Mt has been nixed because of fault line). [/quote]

      The discovered fault line has not caused the site to be nixed.

      “That means designers either must revamp their plans or show regulators that the so-called aging pad, and possibly nearby buildings where nuclear waste would be handled, can be fortified enough to withstand an offset of the rock layers beneath them, said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects.”

      Or find another site. A stumbling block that should have been discovered sooner. It will be fixed. That’s why engineers get the big$.

      [quote=bladerunner]
      With oil going over 100$ a barrel, solar power will be braking even soon if not already. And In the Pacific Northwest the demand for wind power is outstripping construction.[/quote]

      With those two sentences you have sumarized the problems with those two energy sources. If solar power is “breaking even” with oil, why is the demand in the Pacific Northwest for wind power?

      The steam turbines that generate electricity can be fired with oil, natural gas, coal, gasoline, diesel fuel, and nuclear power. Steam turbines are a constant source of enertgy as long as fuel is supplied to the source. Solar collectors are around 10% efficient. But collectors produce electricity. Because the source is not constant (overcast skies and darkness) the energy must be stored. I have a three-square-foot collector, a regulator, and a standard 12v battery to open and close my front gate. How big is your solar array and how many batteries are required to light the lights and run the air conditioners in Los Angeles or New York city? And if you could build that mant batteries where would you put them? And the reason the folks in the Pacific Northwest aren’t clammoring for solar collectors is because it rains a lot there and the sun’s not always available.

      But the wind does blow in the Pacific Northwest. The wind in consistent in many places but not everywhere. Tide generators are useful in Florida, but n ot so much in Wyoming.

      As I previously stated, if we intend to wean ourselves from oil, nuclear power is the answer. It is the cleanest and most reliable of all alternatives.

      [quote=bladerunner]
      PS. what kind of mileage does your Rig get?[/quote]

      The computer on my diesel truck claims around 24-mpg when it’s not loaded. But it will pull 12,000-lbs. Loaded, it’s probably in the single digits. I use a UTV on the ranch. It probably gets 60-mpg.

      Bill

      1. I encourage everyone to READ Bill’s sources
        Vitrification is not yet in use. Nothing has been proven, Yucca mountain is a mess, as the article EXPLAINS. And Bill uses Wikipedia as a source! So please everyone read Bill’s sources. They do not back up what he’s saying, about how great nuclear energy is. But show what a mess nuclear power is today.

        Here is a wonderful link to what is going on at Hanford in Washington State(go to nuclear oversite). If the leak gets to the Columbia River. We are screwed! Billions of dollars and years have already been mispent. Nuclear Waste is very scary stuff.

        http://www.whistleblower.org/content/press_detail.cfm?press-id=471W

        And if we’d spent the money we’ve used to destroy 2 other countries for their oil and opium on alternative energy. Including cleaning up and cleaner nuclear energy, we’d be much better off today, and tomorrow.

        1. I dunno…
          Yes Nuclear may not be everybody’s darling, but I wouldn’t discard it just yet. I believe the chinese have made surprising progress with a new type of small generators that can be connected in series, and as a surpluss generate enough hydrogen to make the concept of hydrogened-powered cars pretty atractive.

          France generates 40% of their energy from nuclear, too. Maybe that’s the reason they were so adamant to be the country where the new experimental fusion reactor will be built in the years to come.

          I’ve been waiting for fusion reactors since I was a kid, and yet they still tell me they’re 40 years in the horizon, IF we’re lucky.

          In the end, we have to remember something: oil will not be replaced solely by one type of alternative energy. That’s something everybody in the R&D keep telling us, there are no silver bullets

          So we would have to use a combination of different energy alternatives to replace oil: Bio-engineered microbes that convert cellulose to ethanol, New types of solar panels that use more of the solar spectrum to generate an electrical current, or focus enough heat to turn water into vapour for turbines. Eolic fans where its convenient, use the energy of waves, geothermal, etc, etc. And yes, nuclear too.

          And Bill wrote something quite important: a revolution in electric batteries is long overdue. If only batteries capacity could follow the efficiency of microprocessors under Moore’s law, we wouldn’t demand so much juice from our local grids. Alas, as microprocessors keep getting more and more powerful, our batteries hardly keep up, and so we read in the news stories about laptops who burst into flames…

          Just my 2 cents on the issue 🙂

          —–
          It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
          It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

          Red Pill Junkie

        2. Vitrification
          [quote=bladerunner]Vitrification is not yet in use. [/quote]

          UIC NEWSLETTER # 5

          Vitrification has been used for many years to treat high-level radioactive wastes in France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Japan.

          Elsewhere in the world, spent fuel is reprocessed to recover unused uranium and plutonium for return to the front end of the fuel cycle, and procedures for treating high-level waste are much further advanced. For instance in Europe:

          • Reprocessing of spent fuel occurs at seven facilities in UK and France with capacity of over 3500 tonnes per year and cumulative experience of 50 000 tonnes over 35 years.

          • Vitrification of the high-level waste arising from reprocessing occurs at five facilities in Belgium, France, and UK with capacity of 2500 canisters (1000 tonnes of glass) per year and operational experience over 16 years.

          • Fabrication of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel using recycled uranium and plutonium now takes place at five facilities in Belgium, France, Germany and UK, with two more under construction. There has been 20 years experience in this, and the first large-scale plant, Melox, started operating in France earlier this year. Across Europe, about 30 reactors are licenced to load 20-50% of their cores with MOX fuel.

          (NEI Overview 14/8/95, UI Core Issues April-May 1995 and various sources quoted in UIC Weekly News Summaries.)

          http://www.uic.com.au/news595.htm

          Bill

          4. another way to say it
            I think bladerunner, that in the US and many other countries, we are stuck in indecision.

            There are solutions, but we are afraid to take any course of action.

            The problem is not that there are not any solutions. There are many solutions that will not hurt anyone. The problem is that we will not even think about these solutions.

            —-
            If we don’t succeed, we run the risk of failure.

            (Bill Clinton, and perhaps others)

  5. Vitrification
    UIC NEWSLETTER # 5

    Vitrification has been used for many years to treat high-level radioactive wastes in France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Japan.

    Elsewhere in the world, spent fuel is reprocessed to recover unused uranium and plutonium for return to the front end of the fuel cycle, and procedures for treating high-level waste are much further advanced. For instance in Europe:

    • Reprocessing of spent fuel occurs at seven facilities in UK and France with capacity of over 3500 tonnes per year and cumulative experience of 50 000 tonnes over 35 years.

    • Vitrification of the high-level waste arising from reprocessing occurs at five facilities in Belgium, France, and UK with capacity of 2500 canisters (1000 tonnes of glass) per year and operational experience over 16 years.

    • Fabrication of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel using recycled uranium and plutonium now takes place at five facilities in Belgium, France, Germany and UK, with two more under construction. There has been 20 years experience in this, and the first large-scale plant, Melox, started operating in France earlier this year. Across Europe, about 30 reactors are licenced to load 20-50% of their cores with MOX fuel.

    (NEI Overview 14/8/95, UI Core Issues April-May 1995 and various sources quoted in UIC Weekly News Summaries.)

    http://www.uic.com.au/news595.htm

    Bill

    1. When I’m asleep
      Good morning, everyone,
      So many good debates go on here while I’m asleep. Isn’t there anyone in my time zone?
      I want to make one thing clear. We must not get rid of our politicians or entrepreneurs. We need them. They’re good at what they do. Which is the problem. They’ve got too good – their game is now honed to perfection, and as such they no longer serve, but have contempt for the voter/consumer/environment. So they need their wings clipped. Brought down to Earth. Reminded who’s boss around here. Namely, us.
      Then they can start to rebuild. And I’m convinced that that will come from going smaller. That’s why I could never agree with the nuclear option. No matter what method is used, it takes ‘big’ to do. And as long as we allow ‘big’, the contempt will stay.
      Yes, all forms of alternatives need to be used, and I don’t want to hear engineers spouting off about the impossibilities of it. I’ve worked with engineers before, and I know one thing about them. Ask them to solve a problem, and throw enough money and resources at them, and they’ll solve it. And pretty damned quick.
      I have total faith in the ability of our technologists. As long as we give them the right resources, and take their off-topic comments with a pinch of salt.

      …

      Wise people usually begin as stupid ones

      Anthony North

      1. Big
        Hi Anthony,

        I’ll take big over small with lots of competition. With as little government as possible. Make mine with reactors. Difference of opinion. Meh.

        Bill

        Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world

        Thomas Carlyle

        1. Fittest
          Survival of the fittest, eh? Cool.
          Except … I seem to remember it’s about being in harmony with the environment.

          …

          Reality, like time, is relative to the observer

          Anthony North

          1. Finest
            Hi Anthony,

            I started out to give you a smart-ass comment about revolving doors but I had a change of heart. So, one more time for the folks in the balcony…..

            Nuclear power plants produce less pollution than any other steam turbine power plants including coal, natural gas, oil, or gasoline. They also produce less CO2 than other energy sources for the fans of GW. Solar, tidal, and wind turbines are interesting products, but they require energy storage devices as well as collectors. Further, each has geographical and environmental limitations.

            The downside of nuclear power production is contaminated waste. This is a problem but we have solutions. Solutions to the waste problem are well known in Europe. Vitrification of nuclear waste is beginning in Japan and the United States.

            The demand for electrical power worldwide will increase in the future. It would be in the best interest of all of us to standardize reactor design and processes. The safety record of reactors in the United States is a good model; there has never been a death in or caused by a reactor in the USA. France has the most experience in nuclear reactor design. A concerted effort by the “nuke club” would produce the best product, the product most in harmony with nature, if you will.

            The power consumption for the City of Los Angeles on July 21, 2006 was 22,622 megawatts by 4 pm. That’s 22-billion watts in two-thirds of a single day. The infrastructure needed to design, build, and maintain a 22-billion watt demand must be large, powerful, and robust. But there are several power companies one may choose from to supply that power, each using a common infrastructure. I want suppliers competing for my business by offering lower rates, better service, or perks. I also want suppliers that are well-financed, solvent, and responsive. This type of supplier is in harmony with nature – ask Ayn Rand instead of Karl Marx.

            For those so inclined you may now return to the revolving door.

            Bill

            ************

            Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
            Thomas Carlyle

          2. Diversity
            Hi Bill,
            The real smart-ass comment was this:

            ‘Except … I seem to remember it’s about being in harmony with the environment.’

            This is about being as one with nature, and nature is all about diversity and taking every road open to it, and never – ever – putting all into one thing, or ‘big’.
            And yes, this is only my opinion.

            …

            I’m fanatical about moderation

            Anthony North

          3. Bill – Never
            “A concerted effort by the ‘nuke club’ would produce the best product, the product most in harmony with nature, if you will.” Your statement.

            Never. Never, never, never. There is nothing about nuclear power that is in the least harmonious with nature.

            The reprocessing plant at Sellafield in the Uk has poisoned the Irish Sea, poisoned beaches on the NW coast of England, spread pollution all over one of the most beautiful scenic areas of Britain (the Lake District), had numerous accidents (usually hushed up), ‘mislaid’ vast quantities of uranium, and at present has a leakage problem they don’t know how to solve. Very environmentally friendly, I’m sure.

            That’s my final word on the subject. Never.

            Kathrinn

          4. Never is a long time
            Hi Kathrinn and Anthony,

            Diversity of sources? Absolutely! Use solar panels to run generators, hydroelectric, wind turbines and generators, and tide/wave generators or whatever to generate electricity if you can. In some places one can even sell electricity back to the provider.

            But some have cloudy days, everyone has nightfall, most have no river to dam, wind is constant in few places, and tides and waves are limited geographically. That leaves the majority wanting for some reliable energy source to heat the water, to produce the steam, to spin the turbines that generate electricity. Large (Big) amounts of electricity are needed to run our society.

            That energy source can be coal, oil, gas, gasoline, or uranium. I would like to curtail use of the so-called “fossil” fuels and use energy sources that don’t foul our atmosphere. IMO, that leaves uranium as our best option. Also, IMO, standardized design and processes will result in cleaner, safer generators worldwide.

            I don’t think Exxon or Shell will starve, nor do I believe the world economy will collapse if we wean ourselves from hydrocarbons. I have no stockpile of U-235 I’m trying to unload, so if anyone has a better solution please share. But don’t delude yourself – we are not going to require less power in the world. Conserve, of course, but emerging countries want the same luxuries that we enjoy. The question is “what is the best method to generate more power?”

            I have read a plan that involves a solar array on the moon that converts solar energy to microwaves that are transmitted to earth for conversion to electricity. What could go wrong? ;o) I’ll entertain any other idea, but not that one.

            Here’s your chance to change the world for the better. Keep burning hydrocarbons? IMO, nuclear seems to be the best option to date. Tell me a better one.

            Bill

            ************

            Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
            Thomas Carlyle

          5. temporary
            My guess is that the critical factor in using solar, wind, waves and so on is the storage issue. Batteries of some sort.

            We can use chemical storage, like our current batteries. Or gravity, like water tanks. Or compressed air. Or many other things that I don’t know about.

            When (not if) we have this storage issue figured out, we can use all the free energy sources that are available. After all, we are afraid of global warming. Too much energy, not too little.

            I favour distributed systems, but not for political reasons. Centralized system often are vulnerable to large scale failures, when the center fails. Distributed solutions fail more softly.

            But I do understand why centralized solutions are favoured at this point. Efficient management and control is easier, and we don’t know how to get a distributed system to behave nicely.

            —-
            If we don’t succeed, we run the risk of failure.

            (Bill Clinton, and perhaps others)

          6. That’s a tough choice…
            But, as earthling pointed out, we will only make such hard choices when we run out of options and have the problem staring us in the face.

            As I wrote, I think we could employ nuclear long enough until we can learn how to mantain a fusion reaction long enough to give more energy than it takes, or come up with something more exotic, like antimatter or point-zero energy. And we have to remember that most probably those kinds of breakthroughs will be accomplished with the aid of ma$$ive fundings; it is unlikely that a fusion reactor will be built in someone’s garage (yes, I’m aware of the cold fusion stories, and I certainly do not dismiss them, but those devices generate puny amounts of energy so far, more research is needed)

            I understand Bill’s arguments about reliance on big corporations, and also Anthony’s complaints about monopolies (here in Mexico, everything is a monopoly, and the services suck!). We should probably try to employ the best of both worlds: Try to make our private homes and vehicles as autonomous and energy-efficient as possible, but leave sensitive installations and infra-structure dependant on big energy systems. If I have solar panels at home and suddenly the day gets cloudy and I’m forced either to switch off the fridge or turn on a gas generator, that would be cumbersome but not deadly; now imagine the same situation in a hospital.

            Until we humans evolve our civilization from class 0 to class 1 (that means, that we can utilize the energy of a whole planet) we will have to depend on a large variety of solutions for our ever-increasing energy consumption. Bill’s right, people in the 3rd world want more access to electricity because energy not only serves to make our leisure gadgets work, it can save lives too.

            —–
            It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
            It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

            Red Pill Junkie

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal