The AM Forum
May 07, 2024, 05:10:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Fuel oil  (Read 20403 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
WB2RJR
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 400


1st BCT, 10th Mountain, returned from Iraq 11/2008


« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2008, 08:33:14 PM »

Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty and all:

Jimmy Carter isn't running for political office and it's been how many administrations since?  I recently met him, he's a frail and old man deserving of our national respect as a former president of the United States, as is the current president. Even if we disagree.

Can we shift this thread away from the partisanship now?

Bill,

I voted for Carter in 1976. I thought he was an honest and just man. I still do. I just don't think he is a good manager.

Point taken. Someone after him should have rescinded this order.

Would you have done it and taken the heat from the Greenies?
Logged

AMI #20, GACW #786
WA1GFZ
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11151



« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2008, 09:03:01 PM »

I thought Carter was a nuke engineer in the Navy? Maybe he didn't like what he saw going on. I bet he had a good reason at the time. I bet it had nothing to do with greenies. Raygun killed tax credits for solar power that Carter put in place. I took advantage of them in the last year.
Today we have a place to put waste out in the Nevada desert.
We should build more nuke plants and do it right.
Logged
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #27 on: October 24, 2008, 01:08:52 AM »

I thought Carter was a nuke engineer in the Navy? Maybe he didn't like what he saw going on. I bet he had a good reason at the time. I bet it had nothing to do with greenies. Raygun killed tax credits for solar power that Carter put in place. I took advantage of them in the last year.
Today we have a place to put waste out in the Nevada desert.
We should build more nuke plants and do it right.
I thought Yucca Mountain was on hold.   I remember an uproar from the citizens of The Great State of Nevada who thought maybe we ought to put the stuff in somebody else's state.  Is Yucca Mountain  back on?
Logged
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #28 on: October 24, 2008, 01:13:36 AM »

Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty and all:

Jimmy Carter isn't running for political office and it's been how many administrations since?  I recently met him, he's a frail and old man deserving of our national respect as a former president of the United States, as is the current president. Even if we disagree.

Can we shift this thread away from the partisanship now?

Bill,

I voted for Carter in 1976. I thought he was an honest and just man. I still do. I just don't think he is a good manager.

Point taken. Someone after him should have rescinded this order.

Would you have done it and taken the heat from the Greenies?
There just has to be more to this or somebody -- Reagan, Bush,  GW Bush, would have changed that order.
Logged
Jim KF2SY
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 290



« Reply #29 on: October 24, 2008, 10:36:39 AM »

Shhhhhh!!!
You'll wake the secret people. 
"They" are light sleepers and are probably listening from the
underground bunkers of Walmart's across the land.
In a few weeks the mothership will arrive and take the dark lords back
to the dark star to plot more mayhem.  Be safe, and remember "They"
are out to get YOU.

 Shocked
Logged
KB2WIG
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4467



« Reply #30 on: October 24, 2008, 11:00:25 AM »

They can't get me


* them.jpg (2.98 KB, 95x123 - viewed 441 times.)
Logged

What? Me worry?
K3ZS
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1036



« Reply #31 on: October 24, 2008, 11:35:47 AM »

It has been 30 years since TMI, and that did not cause any deaths or injuries.   How many has coal mining caused in the last 30 years?     If we can have safe airline travel, we ought to be able to have a safe nuclear power industry.    There has been a lot of new technology produced in the last 30 years that ought to be applied.
Logged
KB2WIG
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4467



« Reply #32 on: October 24, 2008, 12:25:53 PM »

It has been 30 years since TMI, and that did not cause any deaths or injuries.   How many has coal mining caused in the last 30 years?     If we can have safe airline travel, we ought to be able to have a safe nuclear power industry.    There has been a lot of new technology produced in the last 30 years that ought to be applied.

Please don't apply logic or reasoning when you discuss energy, envyronmentalism , or politicks........

klc

Where did spel check go?
Logged

What? Me worry?
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #33 on: October 24, 2008, 02:07:04 PM »

It has been 30 years since TMI, and that did not cause any deaths or injuries.   How many has coal mining caused in the last 30 years?     If we can have safe airline travel, we ought to be able to have a safe nuclear power industry.    There has been a lot of new technology produced in the last 30 years that ought to be applied.

The arguments I've heard against nuclear power are economic not environmental. 

I did a minor amount of Googling just now which confirmed what I thought.  The actual cost of nuclear power has been higher than coal. When you throw in the uncertainties of nuclear plant construction and operation -- delays, overruns and shut downs, the economic case just has not been there.

The nuclear industry now says it will be cheaper in the future because they've figured out how to build these things on time and keep them running.  They talk about a few standardized designs. (I wonder whose) and project lower costs than coal.   The various reports from all sorts of nuclear industry groups go on to talk about other benefits of nuclear power principally the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

And, like everybody else, they want subsidies of one sort or another.
Logged
WA1GFZ
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11151



« Reply #34 on: October 24, 2008, 02:37:44 PM »

It is time the federal govt. tells the people of Navade Yucca is on and live with it. Nobody lives anywhere near it out in the bad lands anyway. Where we going to put it down town L.A. WTF.
The Navy has been running nuke power for 50 years so it can be done.
The nuke plant here in Ct. runs well. But then there are the idiots who built Diablo over the fault. I would think that quite stupid.
Coal is also good if you do it clean. There is a plant next to RT91 in Ma. where nothing comes out of the stack.
We can do either once we pull our heads out of our asses.
Logged
Ed/KB1HYS
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1848



« Reply #35 on: October 24, 2008, 03:48:38 PM »

Nuke power is safe, efficient and cost effective IF you do it right.  The French have been running Civil Nuke Plants for Decades with nary a proton out of place. If they can do we certainly can. 
FWIW I believe the biggest cost driver for the Nuke plants are the oppressive amount of litigation and anti-nuke legislation that then have to deal with. Hold overs from the No-Nuke battles of the 70s.
Logged

73 de Ed/KB1HYS
Happiness is Hot Tubes, Cold 807's, and warm room filling AM Sound.
 "I've spent three quarters of my life trying to figure out how to do a $50 job for $.50, the rest I spent trying to come up with the $0.50" - D. Gingery
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #36 on: October 24, 2008, 09:33:10 PM »

Nuke power is safe, efficient and cost effective IF you do it right.  The French have been running Civil Nuke Plants for Decades with nary a proton out of place. If they can do we certainly can. 
FWIW I believe the biggest cost driver for the Nuke plants are the oppressive amount of litigation and anti-nuke legislation that then have to deal with. Hold overs from the No-Nuke battles of the 70s.
-----
From what I've read it's really three things: 1) Cost overruns building the plants  2) downtime much greater than anticipated  3) coal is cheap here.   

You can Google up complete financial analysis done by anyone you care to listen to but even the most pro nuke guys say this and then say 1) and 2) won't happen in the future.

Let's hope they're right.
Logged
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #37 on: October 25, 2008, 02:16:34 AM »

Here's a great site I've found:  http://www.yuccamountain.org/newslet.htm

I can't tell if it's anti-Yucca mountain or not.   It seems pretty even handed.  It has all sorts of interesting information all well presented including a little bit on the US plans for reprocessing spent fuel.  It appears we are on the way to doing it.  There are plenty of links, even a little information about how things are done in France.

I was right about one thing.  Nevadans aren't happy at having this shoved down their throats.  The state even sued.  Most parts of the lawsuit were thrown out but one was not.

The budget for Yucca Mountain is about a $1/3B/year and they are bitching about it.  They want $ 1/2 billion/year.  That starts adding up to a piece of change, at least I used to think that was some money  until we starting spending the better part of a trillion just to fix screw ups by the Wall Street billionaires.  Wait.  Am I showing my anger about that?
Logged
WU2D
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1797


CW is just a narrower version of AM


« Reply #38 on: October 25, 2008, 11:59:27 AM »

Here in NH, almost half of our electricity comes from the Seabrook Nuc plant located about 45 minutes east. The sin is that we pay huge for electricity here because we had to shut down the project for the second reactor midstream because of politics. Closing that second reactor cost a fortune for the electricity users of the state. The irony is that if the second unit had been completed, we would have been able to shut down our coal plants and that one site would have supplied our entire electrical energy needs.

The present owners say that it is not economically feasible to salvage what is left or build another reactor at this time.

Mike WU2D
Logged

These are the good old days of AM
WA1GFZ
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11151



« Reply #39 on: October 25, 2008, 01:12:51 PM »

Mike,
My NU buddies tell me the present owners of Millstone run the plant better than they ever did. It is all about having the right people in charge. I saw an interesting show on seaspan on nuke power. The NRC is way ahead of our time and ready to step into the future. All we need is the will.
Logged
K6JEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


RF in the shack


« Reply #40 on: October 25, 2008, 03:39:57 PM »

I'd sure like to see that show.  Was it C-Span testimony?  If so it's hopeless.   I don't suppose you remember the name of it.
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #41 on: October 25, 2008, 07:17:35 PM »


I can't tell if it's anti-Yucca mountain or not.   It seems pretty even handed.  It has all sorts of interesting information all well presented including a little bit on the US plans for reprocessing spent fuel.  It appears we are on the way to doing it.  There are plenty of links, even a little information about how things are done in France.

I was right about one thing.  Nevadans aren't happy at having this shoved down their throats.  The state even sued.  Most parts of the lawsuit were thrown out but one was not.

It's one thing to store or reprocess spent nuclear fuel from domestic plants presently in operation.  The inconvenient truth is that the stuff exists and it has to go somewhere.  But now they are proposing to import nuclear waste from countries overseas to store out west.  Is this country in such a sad shape that we are now serving as a dumping ground for other nations' garbage?
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
WB2EMS
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 633



« Reply #42 on: October 26, 2008, 08:34:13 PM »

Quote
But now they are proposing to import nuclear waste from countries overseas to store out west.  Is this country in such a sad shape that we are now serving as a dumping ground for other nations' garbage?

I think the point is to offer safe storage so the spent fuel isn't available to be diverted to weapons purposes. Probably easier to control it if it's sitting under Nevada rather than in some third world country. Plus, there is the potential for reprocessing into useful fuel if we ever get around to building breeder reactors, preferably in the middle of a bunch of shale oil fields so their waste heat can be used to liberate the crude.  I have hope we'll eventually wake up and do something like that. I don't think we can stay stupid forever.

 
Logged

73 de Kevin, WB2EMS
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.065 seconds with 18 queries.