Poor MTG

[utvolpj]

Explain that to China and India who have an open bid to build a many plants as they want according to the Paris Treaty...

Trying but they put me on hold.

Of course some of our pollution burden has just switched to them since we got rid of much of our manufacturing. Sure we look better but the numbers add a whole do not

 

[OHvol40]

Most of what I've read about the subject shows that buried nuclear waste is a far better alternative to carbon waste in the atmosphere. Not perfect of course, but a better way to go. Plus the footprint of nuclear plants are tiny compared to what is needed with solar and wind, and less resource intensive and physicality destructive like coal, oil, and natural gas.

But alas, I am neither one of the 100s of scientists and 1,224,854 lawyers here on VolNation

Pssst, nuclear doesn’t make people rich *hint hint*

 

[utvolpj]

Technology exists and was being deployed and put into coal plants. That is why they came up with the CARBON nonsense. Of course with coal is still coal ash which has to be dealt with... but the same nuclear (waste) or even solar panels or batteries manufacturing.

Here in NC they had a coal ash spill a few years ago, and it will take some time to clean but that can be said of anything. Its pretty ****ing clean where I live. LOL

That is the reason they came up with the whole CARBON monster i.e. it releases carbon so its dirty. LOL Its nonsense. The truth of the matter is this country probably could last a thousand years on coal, and do fairly and reasonable clean unless you consider carbon pollutant.

The myth at all these things are clean are laughable.

If Solar Panels Are So Clean, Why Do They Produce So Much Toxic Waste?

In North Carolina... they consider biomass burning "green energy"... its a scam.

Even man tits Michael Moore figured that one out.

Planet of Humans

No, it's considered dirty because it is. Ask Indiana how they like it. Coal is still around because it's cheap, has existing infrastructure and it has a great lobby. No politician has the rubber to push a 10yr nuke project when they'll only be around for a few. It's why nothing really gets done

They have nuke plants recycling their waste for reuse already. Small footprint and they're built to where they can be sealed off once their lifespan is reached

 

[Grand Vol]

Trying but they put me on hold.

Of course some of our pollution burden has just switched to them since we got rid of much of our manufacturing. Sure we look better but the numbers add a whole do not

You probably had a hard time getting through from all the Democrats thanking the Chinese for their "campaign contributions."

Anyway...

The problem is, as always, the pendulum swings too hard on the environmental settings. Take natural gas for example. Reasonably clean, abundant and, most importantly, available right in our country. And yet, you have idiots in NYC that want to ban it because of the carbon pollution and move to electric ovens and heaters.

Not even stopping to think where that electricity comes from... especially in New York, in the winter when their solar panels aren't doing crap.

But obviously they pat themselves on the back for "doing good" while millions suffer from skyrocketing electric bills. And completely ignore the increased pollution from China and India as you said.

Environmentalists are far more dangerous domestic terrorists than conservatives thought of being.

 

[VolStrom]

It looks like TVA has jumped on the bandwagon with the electric car manufacturers raising prices thanks to the explosion in rates of natural gas and/or government rebates. My TVA electric bill went up 25% this month, thanks Biden.

 

[EasternVol]

She's one of the more intelligent ones. Like Byron Donalds, Boebert and Flores. Would you like more Eric Swallwells and Steve Cohens?

I'll play. How exactly do you measure intelligence? Not like the rest of us, it appears.
You know this but Swalwell being stupid has no bearing on MTG being dumb as a fence post.

 

[EasternVol]

Its not idiotic, its the truth. Wait till you see all the smart (non-idiotic) Germans figuring it out this winter.

The truth of the matter, most of this is a scam... which is why California has energy blackouts and Germans are going to pay a heavy price in the coming years.

How about Texans? Oh wait they're not on the green program.

 

[NurseGoodVol]

Are they unqualified?

Actually he’s extremely qualified and his lifestyle lends me to believe very unstable. Have you read his history?

 

[LSU-SIU]

How about Texans? Oh wait they're not on the green program.

1.) nobody said things don't go down 2.) even if stuff goes down, wind and solar are not as reliable but there are other problems to wind and solar which is what all these countries and states are figuring out including texas.

Not sure what your point is, much of Texas problems can be associated with the use of their wind program.... again, I think that is a generalization.

It doesn't matter what your type of energy you use.... you have to enough capacity. The ability to get capacity from wind/solar is very tough, and economically not very viable.

Its about costs. Germany can probably get all the energy they want.... who the **** can survive at $1KwH.... nobody.... you go back to firewood and horse. Which means people will have to go because you don't feed even close to 7+ billion people with horse tilling.

There has been very little energy capacity added to the grid in 20+ years in the U.S., nobody is building out huge generation.... there has been absolutely no gain in 15+ years in the U.S.

Every State will probably start to have problems.... why? No investment in real things.

 

[LSU-SIU]

No, it's considered dirty because it is. Ask Indiana how they like it. Coal is still around because it's cheap, has existing infrastructure and it has a great lobby. No politician has the rubber to push a 10yr nuke project when they'll only be around for a few. It's why nothing really gets done

They have nuke plants recycling their waste for reuse already. Small footprint and they're built to where they can be sealed off once their lifespan is reached

Its consider "dirty" because someone says so without explaining why it is puts you in nutjob territory, please do everyone a favor... move to California. There are coal plants all over the place, there is technology that scrub the output. Which is why the nutjobs like yourself came up with the CARBON scam.

Scrubbers

This is why you don't have bad air quality like in China. They don't really give a ****.

They have nuke plants recycling their waste for reuse already.

Nuclear power plants hold their nuclear waste in huge tanks as there is nothing they can do with it other than bury it in the ground. All they really can do is store the nuclear waste and hope it doesn't break containment.

Having a discussion with you when you are just making **** up is running its course.

I would place you in nutjob/millennial group, living in fantasy land and not knowing how anything works. It all works with magic.

Nuclear Waste Issues in the United States

The problem of what to do with nuclear waste is largely unsolved in America. Many types of radioactive waste require disposal for tens of thousands of years, and the United States only has one facility engaged in permanent disposal of nuclear waste: the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico, which permanently stores certain forms of radioactive waste generated by the Department of Energy during the research and production of nuclear weapons.

A big issue at Fukushima was the amount of spent nuclear rods stored permanently in the cooling areas. That is what they do, they just store it. Now they have nowhere to put all the nuclear water.... so that's now being dumped in the ocean.

Fukushima operator completes removal of second set of spent fuel rods

Anyone can say anything is dirty, solar panels are dirty. Its easy. Next nutjob thing you are going to say is how environmentally good for batteries to exist. None of this stuff is good, you being here isn't good... its about providing energy and things the planet needs at a reasonable price. Without price... well, lots of people are going to have to liquidated... my guess is people like you will be first. As you can't reason your way out of a paper bag.

I don't really care that you are an extremist, but an ignorant one is beyond dangerous.

 

[EasternVol]

Actually he’s extremely qualified and his lifestyle lends me to believe very unstable. Have you read his history?

The instability is a disqualifier for a position with that much responsibility

 

[EasternVol]

1.) nobody said things don't go down 2.) even if stuff goes down, wind and solar are not as reliable but there are other problems to wind and solar which is what all these countries and states are figuring out including texas.

Not sure what your point is, much of Texas problems can be associated with the use of their wind program.... again, I think that is a generalization.

It doesn't matter what your type of energy you use.... you have to enough capacity. The ability to get capacity from wind/solar is very tough, and economically not very viable.

Its about costs. Germany can probably get all the energy they want.... who the **** can survive at $1KwH.... nobody.... you go back to firewood and horse. Which means people will have to go because you don't feed even close to 7+ billion people with horse tilling.

There has been very little energy capacity added to the grid in 20+ years in the U.S., nobody is building out huge generation.... there has been absolutely no gain in 15+ years in the U.S.

Every State will probably start to have problems.... why? No investment in real things.

That was pretty much my point, that any energy system can fail if it's mismanaged.

 

[utvolpj]

Its consider "dirty" because someone says so without explaining why it is puts you in nutjob territory, please do everyone a favor... move to California. There are coal plants all over the place, there is technology that scrub the output. Which is why the nutjobs like yourself came up with the CARBON scam.

Scrubbers

This is why you don't have bad air quality like in China. They don't really give a ****.



Nuclear power plants hold their nuclear waste in huge tanks as there is nothing they can do with it other than bury it in the ground. All they really can do is store the nuclear waste and hope it doesn't break containment.

Having a discussion with you when you are just making **** up is running its course.

I would place you in nutjob/millennial group, living in fantasy land and not knowing how anything works. It all works with magic.

Nuclear Waste Issues in the United States



A big issue at Fukushima was the amount of spent nuclear rods stored permanently in the cooling areas. That is what they do, they just store it. Now they have nowhere to put all the nuclear water.... so that's now being dumped in the ocean.

Fukushima operator completes removal of second set of spent fuel rods

Anyone can say anything is dirty, solar panels are dirty. Its easy. Next nutjob thing you are going to say is how environmentally good for batteries to exist. None of this stuff is good, you being here isn't good... its about providing energy and things the planet needs at a reasonable price. Without price... well, lots of people are going to have to liquidated... my guess is people like you will be first. As you can't reason your way out of a paper bag.

I don't really care that you are an extremist, but an ignorant one is beyond dangerous.

Coal is dirty. You can make it somewhat less so but it will always be. It's a bad plan to use it going forward. That comes from an engineer who spent decades working with it for the gov. But hey, you found a link so you're more educated. Now look up how it affects places in Indiana

5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel

5. Used fuel can be recycled
That’s right!

Used nuclear fuel can be recycled to make new fuel and byproducts.

More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after five years of operation in a reactor.

The United States does not currently recycle used nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do.

There are also some advanced reactor designs in development that could consume or run on used nuclear fuel in the future.

Fukushima was a disaster made worse by bad planning. It's not an example to use

 

[Matt2496]

.

 

[TOUCHDOWN!!TN]

Breeder reactors? Are they still outlawed?
I’ve been in nuke power since 1977, my last refueling outage is this fall at DCPP.
Good career and good luck to all, some tough choices to come about power generation, it’s a shame politicians make ‘em with lobbyists
Go Big Orange

 

[EasternVol]

Coal is dirty. You can make it somewhat less so but it will always be. It's a bad plan to use it going forward. That comes from an engineer who spent decades working with it for the gov. But hey, you found a link so you're more educated. Now look up how it affects places in Indiana

5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel




Fukushima was a disaster made worse by bad planning. It's not an example to use

Burning coal in plants with scrubbers is green as regards air pollution. If the ash is used in construction then there's little soil and water pollution (of course we need to minimize destructive mining practices too). But psuedo environmentalists in the US have decreed 'no coal' probably for their own financial reasons.
As LSU-SIU mentioned, every source of energy has costs (pollution, environmental degradation, strengthening adversaries, etc.). We need to choose wisely. That there is little or no debate in Congress on such an important issue is very troubling.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Coal is dirty. You can make it somewhat less so but it will always be. It's a bad plan to use it going forward. That comes from an engineer who spent decades working with it for the gov. But hey, you found a link so you're more educated. Now look up how it affects places in Indiana

5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel




Fukushima was a disaster made worse by bad planning. It's not an example to use

Recycling only reduces the amount of waste, it does not eliminate it.... it is dirty as it is producing waste by your definition. And only one country even from the article quote even attempts to recycle. Furthermore, the industrial, mining, and manufacturing of said nuclear plants all involve huge amounts of toxic material, waste, destruction of the environment, etc.

France's Efficiency in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: What Can 'Oui' Learn?

“This makes it possible to limit the volume of materials and to minimize waste, while conditioning it in a safe way. This strategy, which is an important pillar of France’s overall nuclear electricity production, makes a significant contribution to the country’s energy independence.”

I provided a link to show you why the United States doesn't look like China when running coal plants i.e. technology that China isn't using. I didn't need the link, I already knew, it is clear you didn't know.

Solar panels are dirty, nuclear is dirty, wind mills are dirty, the freaking power lines are dirty. Building a bicycle is dirty.

As far as your comment about recycled nuclear material, the plants and process produce nuclear waste, nuclear accidents, plus uncountable amounts of pollution in building them, maintaining them, supplying them, etc.

Its no more clean than anything else, matter of fact when it goes wrong you make the large portions of the planet inhabitable. The reason Germany is shutting down nuclear plants as they believe they are danger to the world, I mean at least you nutjobs should all consider getting on the same insane page.

You need to move to California or some other place so you don't infect the sane people. Let me guess electric cars aren't "dirty".

Fukushima was a disaster made worse by bad planning. It's not an example to use

That's just an excuse, all those plants contain nuclear waste which they can't magically get rid off.... all all those plants require dirty components to build them, maintain them, and run them.

Funny we have coal plants in North Carolina, the only places I see where that is a mess are the inner cities..... where THERE ARE NO COAL PLANTS. They just throw all their trash and chemicals on the street. Coal ash has to be dealt with just like nuclear waste... there IS NO FREE LUNCH. Solar panels require some of the most toxic chemicals on the planet to make and produce, let alone all the processes needed to get the raw materials.

The nutjobs like yourself should at least get on the same page. You're not going to feed 7 billion people without coal, ask China.

Humans produce waste... in a modern society they are going to produce huge amounts of waste... none of this stuff is clean.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Burning coal in plants with scrubbers is green as regards air pollution. If the ash is used in construction then there's little soil and water pollution (of course we need to minimize destructive mining practices too). But psuedo environmentalists in the US have decreed 'no coal' probably for their own financial reasons.
As LSU-SIU mentioned, every source of energy has costs (pollution, environmental degradation, strengthening adversaries, etc.). We need to choose wisely. That there is little or no debate in Congress on such an important issue is very troubling.

The whole "carbon" thing came about because of the advancement of burning coal more efficiently and much cleaner. It wasn't about the amount of pollutants as those were greatly reduced, so they had to come up with a pollutant that couldn't be eliminated i.e. carbon.

Either way, the people in 2/3rd of the world (China/India/etc.) aren't giving up their coal, why? Well, starvation is one hell of an incentive.

I live in an area that still uses bunches of coal, multiple coal generators within a hour. Nothing here looks like China, must be magic coal. Now coal ash must be managed just like any waste from any of these processes. Human produce waste and all generations of energy produce waste, if done correctly I don't see it as any worse or better than anything else. Each situation is different and area is different.

Either way... nobody is feeding 7+ billion off of solar and wind in the next couple of hundred years. And I doubt there will be much movement on nuclear, most countries don't even have nuclear plants. So... that means burning other stuff for most of them. Without cheap energy, there is no cheap food.

That guy probably won't even be alive by the time they build a new nuclear plant in the United States... its basically a 15-25 year process. (I think the one in Georgia is being expanded)

These nuts think you just turn a switch and it just works, and its magically just cheap. Without the "cheap" part, civilization as we know it ends.

That there is little or no debate in Congress on such an important issue is very troubling.

Depopulation is the end game which is why there is no real discussion. Its not a mistake, its a plan.

What I really get a kick out of these people that say you shouldn't burn stuff, even though everything they are using requires burning. (the irony) Most of its going to eventually burn anyway. The planet has molten core. All that coal is eventually going to burn.

Burning Mountain Has Been Burning For 6000 Years

So, the fires that are burning underground and burning for thousands of years are "dirty". LOL