Have you been there? It tops my list of places to go. Largely on account of photos like these from gehard Huedepohl Though a good friends son just came back from backpacking through South America and said the Uyuni salt flats were even better.
In 1978, I returned to the Lakes region of southern Chile to work as a recreational fishing guide. I got as far as Salta, NW Argentina near the border and could no longer continue hitchhiking as the roads were closed for a massive military mobilization. Argentina and Chile were at the cusp of war over 3 islands in the Beagle Channel.
I managed to hitch a ride on a freight train. The Argentinian freight train workers were great! That worked up to the border with Chile. There I had to wait for a passenger train and pay passage. I believe that crossing is called Socompa. I took advantage of the wait to hike the nearby hills. Spectacular.
Within a few the days the Pope brokered a truce and ultimately a peace deal though I am shaky on details. I have some colour slides of Argentinian soldiers and Chilean carbineros (Chile's border police) arm in arm with big smiles on their faces. Everybody said that war would not happen. It did not.
Incidentally, if you ever happen to be in the area, a trip into the stunning Atacama Desert is most worthwhile.
Have you been there? It tops my list of places to go. Largely on account of photos like these from gehard Huedepohl Though a good friends son just came back from backpacking through South America and said the Uyuni salt flats were even better.
Michael Shellenberger believes the Green New Deal’s focus on wind and solar is a waste of time and money.
Watch the above video to learn more about the history of nuclear energy and to hear more from Shellenberger about his case for nuclear power, as well as his response to concerns about radiation, nuclear weapons, and nuclear's economic viability. The video also features solar energy advocate Ed Smeloff, who served on the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District board during the shutdown of California's Rancho Seco nuclear plant. Smeloff argues that nuclear power simply can't compete in the marketplace.
Sadly at this point of technology this is accurate.
shellenberger's delivery could be better
but overall i'm pretty excited and hopeful that good things are coming
there's a lot of talent and resources busy in the energy sector
market forces (mass production and its corollary mass consumption) should bring down prices and accelerate innovation
Michael Shellenberger believes the Green New Deal’s focus on wind and solar is a waste of time and money.
Watch the above video to learn more about the history of nuclear energy and to hear more from Shellenberger about his case for nuclear power, as well as his response to concerns about radiation, nuclear weapons, and nuclear's economic viability. The video also features solar energy advocate Ed Smeloff, who served on the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District board during the shutdown of California's Rancho Seco nuclear plant. Smeloff argues that nuclear power simply can't compete in the marketplace.
Sadly at this point of technology this is accurate.
Michael Shellenberger believes the Green New Deal’s focus on wind and solar is a waste of time and money.
Watch the above video to learn more about the history of nuclear energy and to hear more from Shellenberger about his case for nuclear power, as well as his response to concerns about radiation, nuclear weapons, and nuclear's economic viability. The video also features solar energy advocate Ed Smeloff, who served on the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District board during the shutdown of California's Rancho Seco nuclear plant. Smeloff argues that nuclear power simply can't compete in the marketplace.
Legislation was praised by Bill Gates, who has funded an advanced nuclear company.
Last week, a bipartisan group of 15 US senators re-introduced a bill to instate the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act (NELA), which would offer incentives and set federal goals for advanced nuclear energy. A smaller group of senators originally introduced the bill in September of last year, but the Congressional session ended before the Senate voted on it.
Specifically, the bill authorizes the federal government to enter into 40-year power purchase agreements (PPAs) with nuclear power companies, as opposed to the 10-year agreements that were previously authorized. Securing a 40-year PPA would essentially guarantee to an advanced nuclear startup that it could sell its power for 40 years, which reduces the uncertainty that might come with building a complex and complicated power source.
Legislation was praised by Bill Gates, who has funded an advanced nuclear company.
Last week, a bipartisan group of 15 US senators re-introduced a bill to instate the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act (NELA), which would offer incentives and set federal goals for advanced nuclear energy. A smaller group of senators originally introduced the bill in September of last year, but the Congressional session ended before the Senate voted on it.
Specifically, the bill authorizes the federal government to enter into 40-year power purchase agreements (PPAs) with nuclear power companies, as opposed to the 10-year agreements that were previously authorized. Securing a 40-year PPA would essentially guarantee to an advanced nuclear startup that it could sell its power for 40 years, which reduces the uncertainty that might come with building a complex and complicated power source.
That was a great video—thanks very much for posting and for adding all the timestamped highlights. It's a shame that Bill's talk wasn't annotated and footnoted because he threw out so many points and numbers that you want further explanation as to the consequences of those facts. Worth watching twice.
Two pointless thoughts: Bill Gates is undeniably brilliant and well informed but he has this jumpy, awkward persona in this video. I think he's like that much of the time. And pink is not his color.
the credit goes to gordon mcdowell (his youtube channel is a very good resource for such things)
9:00 Gates restates Vaclav Smil observations on Tokyo energy requirements. "Tell me what battery solution is going to sit there and provide that power?" That's nothing that doesn't solve the reliability problem. 9:37 "Clean Energy" and the narrow perspective of recent clean energy conference. What about manufacturing of steel? What about flying planes in the sky? 11:23 The idea "we have all the tools" and utility people are blocking climate progress because they're evil people are more of a block on climate progress than climate denialism.
11:50 You need nuclear fission or fusion running 24/7. If renewable then need a monster miracle in grid storage. A battery you only need once-per-year but is cheap (for rest of year). 13:00 Transport problems other than cars. 24% of emissions are agricultural and meat. Very difficult. Is why Gates funds "Beyond Meat" type products. 15:00 Magnitude of problem if people think biz-as-usual and carbon can be captured and stored (on top of biz-as-usual). 16:11 Improving photosynthetic efficiency. Factor of 2 to be had. 18:40 Nuclear. Cost competitiveness.
20:10 Nuclear safest form of energy per output. Today's designs pathetic, needs to be redone for digital age. So no pressure anywhere. 4th Gen Nuclear, TerraPower is ONLY well-funded project. "Nuclear in China is cheaper than coal."
21:45 We shut down FFTF, and China is building needed test facilities (nuclear). 23:00 What possible reward do utilities have for taking risk on new energy technologies? 23:38 Anything you do in energy today won't scale up until your patents expire. 24:00 Fusion economics is hard. Fission has neutrons that degrade material is toughest part of Travelling Wave Reactor (TWR). Fusions neutrons far more energetic. 28:10 No big play fission companies, but in fusion quite a few. Some look sketchy but thank God they're trying.
That was a great video—thanks very much for posting and for adding all the timestamped highlights. It's a shame that Bill's talk wasn't annotated and footnoted because he threw out so many points and numbers that you want further explanation as to the consequences of those facts. Worth watching twice.
Two pointless thoughts: Bill Gates is undeniably brilliant and well informed but he has this jumpy, awkward persona in this video. I think he's like that much of the time. And pink is not his color.
9:00 Gates restates Vaclav Smil observations on Tokyo energy requirements. "Tell me what battery solution is going to sit there and provide that power?" That's nothing that doesn't solve the reliability problem. 9:37 "Clean Energy" and the narrow perspective of recent clean energy conference. What about manufacturing of steel? What about flying planes in the sky? 11:23 The idea "we have all the tools" and utility people are blocking climate progress because they're evil people are more of a block on climate progress than climate denialism.
11:50 You need nuclear fission or fusion running 24/7. If renewable then need a monster miracle in grid storage. A battery you only need once-per-year but is cheap (for rest of year). 13:00 Transport problems other than cars. 24% of emissions are agricultural and meat. Very difficult. Is why Gates funds "Beyond Meat" type products. 15:00 Magnitude of problem if people think biz-as-usual and carbon can be captured and stored (on top of biz-as-usual). 16:11 Improving photosynthetic efficiency. Factor of 2 to be had. 18:40 Nuclear. Cost competitiveness.
20:10 Nuclear safest form of energy per output. Today's designs pathetic, needs to be redone for digital age. So no pressure anywhere. 4th Gen Nuclear, TerraPower is ONLY well-funded project. "Nuclear in China is cheaper than coal."
21:45 We shut down FFTF, and China is building needed test facilities (nuclear). 23:00 What possible reward do utilities have for taking risk on new energy technologies? 23:38 Anything you do in energy today won't scale up until your patents expire. 24:00 Fusion economics is hard. Fission has neutrons that degrade material is toughest part of Travelling Wave Reactor (TWR). Fusions neutrons far more energetic. 28:10 No big play fission companies, but in fusion quite a few. Some look sketchy but thank God they're trying.
The environment doesn't care about our poor planning.
I see your point, but unless you can get people to stop reproducing at the current rate, and cut their consumption by ~30%, there isn't another source on deck that can meet the need. We need solar, we need wind, we need geothermal and tidal, but we need nuclear too. And the irony of the environmentalists dissing a major component of the solution to an environmental problem is pretty ripe. Nuclear can and has been done well and safely (see France). And if you leave it out of the solution, you don't have a solution.
ironically, the more energy we produce the higher/better quality of life we have, the fewer children we have
hans rosling has churned out scads of research on this
Safe and clean energy
Generating power using a Molten Salt Reactor closely meets the safety, waste, cost and CO2 standards that we expect of today’s energy technology. As long ago as the 1960s, the Molten Salt Reactor was shown to be possible in principle. Although research at the time was suspended because other demands were being placed on reactor technology, it has now been resumed internationally.
Research into molten salt at Petten
Research reactors such as the High Flux Reactor (HFR) at Petten are indispensable to the development of new reactor technology such as the Molten Salt Reactor. With the experiments that can be carried out in the HFR, molten salt technology can be shown to work just as the theory has predicted.
The research at Petten currently consists of molten salt irradiation, materials research, helium bubbling research, gamma irradiation and waste management.
A subsequent step in the research could be the development of a tube in which molten salt can be pumped around under representative conditions. The realisation of such a facility can be a decisive step forward for the international research into Molten Salt Reactors.
