Climate continues to change.

[gunthernehmen]

The costs of building a nuclear power plant are "artificial"?

Not to mention long term maintenance and eventual decommissioning?

What does one single shut down and refueling cost?

If it's all so easy and cheap the cost benefits would easily outweigh the NIMBY's and envrironazis.

The truth is that every nuclear power plant provides weapons material.

https://cnduk.org/resources/links-nuclear-power-nuclear-weapons/

Not only do you choose to ignore basic science, you also are ignorant of history.

Ok, ok. I get it. Nuclear baaaad.

Luddites will luddite, I guess.

 

[Hal9000_]

You do not "get it" In any sense of the phrase.

Nuclear not "bad".

Nuclear inefficient and not cost effective.

Nuclear useful for one thing:

Weapons.

https://wiseinternational.org/nucle...nk-between-nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons

 

[Klinkster]

So tell me.....why would the US DOD need nuclear power plants to build bombs?
They didn't need to to build all the ones that they have built....and they don't need 'em to build the ones they are building.....

Might be they have a little stockpile of uranium the built up, since the end of WWII.....

The truth is that every nuclear power plant provides weapons material.

Not only do you choose to ignore basic science, you also are ignorant of history.

 

[Klinkster]

But what is cleaner? What is 'carbon neutral'?

And since when is cost effective a part of the equation?
Wind turbines certainly are not.
Nor is solar....without subsidies, it's sure not.

You do not "get it" In any sense of the phrase.

Nuclear not "bad".

Nuclear inefficient and not cost effective.

Nuclear useful for one thing:

Weapons.

https://wiseinternational.org/nucle...nk-between-nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons

 

[phrodeau]

But what is cleaner? What is 'carbon neutral'?

And since when is cost effective a part of the equation?
Wind turbines certainly are not.
Nor is solar....without subsidies, it's sure not.

Please name an energy source that isn’t subsidized.

 

[Klinkster]

None that I know of.
But solar, and wind, are subsidized more than others. A lot more.

I believe, none should be. The gov’t should not pick the winners and losers.

Please name an energy source that isn’t subsidized.

 

[Que]

Please name an energy source that isn’t subsidized.

Dragging those goalposts.

He is speaking directly of viability sans subsidy, and that is just the US end of it.

. Especially when you consider that we already know from solyndra the actual cost of manufacture which means China is dumping. Because it's somewhat serves our national interest to have cheap solar panels to keep net energy cost down and energy exports up, we pretend they are not trading profitability to control the market in the future.

They have done this, sector by sector of industry.

Even with the subsidies in cheap Chinese panels neither Rob , you, nor Von Bismarck have them on their homes despite all of you championing them.

 

[Que]

None that I know of.
But solar, and wind, are subsidized more than others. A lot more.

I believe, none should be. The gov’t should not pick the winners and losers.

We subsidize sugar and then we use farm bill money to allow the poorest of us to guzzle soda, and eat sugary junk food, get obesity and sugar-intake related diseases which we then pay to treat through Medicaid.

We subsidize ethanol, despite the fact that it increases, rather than decreases our use of petroleum and ads to the cost of food, making food stamps necessary and ensuring it takes more money to run that program.

We do a lot of counter-productive things.

 

[Klinkster]

We subsidize a lot of things.....way too many things....and yup....we shouldn’t.
We sure as hell shouldn’t.

If it moves, tax it.
If it keeps moving, regulate it.
If it stops moving, subsidize it.
(R.R.)

We subsidize sugar and then we use farm bill money to allow the poorest of us to guzzle soda, and eat sugary junk food, get obesity and sugar-intake related diseases which we then pay to treat through Medicaid.

We subsidize ethanol, despite the fact that it increases, rather than decreases our use of petroleum and ads to the cost of food, making food stamps necessary and ensuring it takes more money to run that program.

We do a lot of counter-productive things.

 

[phrodeau]

None that I know of.
But solar, and wind, are subsidized more than others. A lot more.

I believe, none should be. The gov’t should not pick the winners and losers.

And I’ll just take your word for it, rather than expecting you to back up your claim. I learned that never happens.

 

[trysail]

“Extreme weather events such as cyclones, floods, droughts and tornadoes are not increasing in incidence or lives lost. Indeed, the global mortality from all weather-related natural disasters declined by 99 percent while the population trebled after 1920, thanks to improved economies and technologies. Food production and calorie consumption per capita continue to increase, thanks to the green revolution, increased CO2 fertilization and longer growing seasons. Fossil fuels contribute enormously to the production, safe storage and transport of food and thus to human nutrition.”

-Caleb Rossiter, Ph.D.​

​

 

[RobDownSouth]

Downsouth 1, Trysail 0

“Extreme weather events such as cyclones, floods, droughts and tornadoes are not increasing in incidence or lives lost. Indeed, the global mortality from all weather-related natural disasters declined by 99 percent while the population trebled after 1920, thanks to improved economies and technologies. Food production and calorie consumption per capita continue to increase, thanks to the green revolution, increased CO2 fertilization and longer growing seasons. Fossil fuels contribute enormously to the production, safe storage and transport of food and thus to human nutrition.”

-Caleb Rossiter, Ph.D.​

​

Meanwhile, back in the reality-based world...

Flooding, one of the most dangerous weather events, has caused an increasing number of deaths the last few years.

In the last 30 years, an average of 86 people have died in floods each year. In the last 10 years, that annual average increased to 95. In the last three years, since 2015, more than 100 people have died annually because of floods.

This trend will likely continue as climate change increases the risk of heavy rainfall. The number of days with extremely heavy precipitation has increased 1 to 2 percent every decade in both typically wet and dry locations.

More and more floods are occurring away from the coast. In the last 10 years, eight of the 10 states with the most flooding disasters are inland.

LINK

 

[trysail]

Straight from NOAA:
The historic U.S. temperature record has been materially distorted by siting of urban weather stations.






Impacts of Small-Scale Urban Encroachment on Air Temperature Observations

by Ronald D. Leeper, John Kochendorfer, Timothy Henderson, and Michael A. Palecki

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JAMC-D-19-0002.1

Abstract (bold mine)

A field experiment was performed in Oak Ridge, TN, with four instrumented towers placed over grass at increasing distances (4, 30, 50, 124, and 300 m) from a built-up area. Stations were aligned in such a way to simulate the impact of small-scale encroachment on temperature observations. As expected, temperature observations were warmest for the site closest to the built environment with an average temperature difference of 0.31 and 0.24 °C for aspirated and unaspirated sensors respectively. Mean aspirated temperature differences were greater during the evening (0.47 °C) than day (0.16 °C). This was particularly true for evenings following greater daytime solar insolation (20+ MJDay−1) with surface winds from the direction of the built environment where mean differences exceeded 0.80 °C. The impact of the built environment on air temperature diminished with distance with a warm bias only detectable out to tower-B’ located 50 meters away.

The experimental findings were comparable to a known case of urban encroachment at a U. S. Climate Reference Network station in Kingston, RI. The experimental and operational results both lead to reductions in the diurnal temperature range of ~0.39 °C for fan aspirated sensors. Interestingly, the unaspirated sensor had a larger reduction in DTR of 0.48 °C. These results suggest that small-scale urban encroachment within 50 meters of a station can have important impacts on daily temperature extrema (maximum and minimum) with the magnitude of these differences dependent upon prevailing environmental conditions and sensing technology.​

​

 

[Klinkster]

The pot calling the kettle black.....

You have never backed up any of your claims, and have failed to answer any question put to you.

Why don't you look at the tax deductions you can get if you install solar on your house?
Varies by state, but the Federal subsidies apply to all.
Would you like a list of failed alternative energy companies, that failed, and never paid back the loans they got back from the taxpayers?

And I’ll just take your word for it, rather than expecting you to back up your claim. I learned that never happens.

 

[gunthernehmen]

You do not "get it" In any sense of the phrase.

Nuclear not "bad".

Nuclear inefficient and not cost effective.

Nuclear useful for one thing:

Weapons.

https://wiseinternational.org/nucle...nk-between-nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons

The knives in my kitchen could be used as weapons.

The car in my driveway could be used as a weapon.

The baseball bat in my closet could be used as a weapon.

The rope or in the garage could be used as a weapon.

None of them are, but they could be.

You hate nuclear power because you've been told to by your Luddite priests.

 

[RocketLauncher]

And I’ll just take your word for it, rather than expecting you to back up your claim. I learned that never happens.

The pot calling the kettle black.....

You have never backed up any of your claims, and have failed to answer any question put to you.

Why don't you look at the tax deductions you can get if you install solar on your house?
Varies by state, but the Federal subsidies apply to all.
Would you like a list of failed alternative energy companies, that failed, and never paid back the loans they got back from the taxpayers?

I'd put him on iggy but his lack of understanding and reading comprehension coupled with no redeeming qualities at all astounds me.
Stay in school, kids!

 

[von_Bismarck]

I'd put him on iggy but his lack of understanding and reading comprehension coupled with no redeeming qualities at all astounds me.
Stay in school, kids!

I think you would have enjoyed coach dweeb. He was seriously ill-informed (borderline conspiracy nut job), easily provoked, and claimed to be a member of Mensa.

 

[RocketLauncher]

I think you would have enjoyed coach dweeb. He was seriously ill informed (borderline conspiracy nut job), easily provoked, and claimed to be a member of Mensa.

From the amount of people who claim to be a member of Mensa their membership must equal the population of China, if not larger.
Wonder if Kinkster is a member?

 

[icanhelp1]

You do not "get it" In any sense of the phrase.

Nuclear not "bad".

Nuclear inefficient and not cost effective.

Nuclear useful for one thing:

Weapons.

https://wiseinternational.org/nucle...nk-between-nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons

There are nuclear reactors that don't generate weapons grade nuclear material.

 

[icanhelp1]

Straight from NOAA:
The historic U.S. temperature record has been materially distorted by siting of urban weather stations.






Impacts of Small-Scale Urban Encroachment on Air Temperature Observations

by Ronald D. Leeper, John Kochendorfer, Timothy Henderson, and Michael A. Palecki

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/JAMC-D-19-0002.1

Abstract (bold mine)

A field experiment was performed in Oak Ridge, TN, with four instrumented towers placed over grass at increasing distances (4, 30, 50, 124, and 300 m) from a built-up area. Stations were aligned in such a way to simulate the impact of small-scale encroachment on temperature observations. As expected, temperature observations were warmest for the site closest to the built environment with an average temperature difference of 0.31 and 0.24 °C for aspirated and unaspirated sensors respectively. Mean aspirated temperature differences were greater during the evening (0.47 °C) than day (0.16 °C). This was particularly true for evenings following greater daytime solar insolation (20+ MJDay−1) with surface winds from the direction of the built environment where mean differences exceeded 0.80 °C. The impact of the built environment on air temperature diminished with distance with a warm bias only detectable out to tower-B’ located 50 meters away.

The experimental findings were comparable to a known case of urban encroachment at a U. S. Climate Reference Network station in Kingston, RI. The experimental and operational results both lead to reductions in the diurnal temperature range of ~0.39 °C for fan aspirated sensors. Interestingly, the unaspirated sensor had a larger reduction in DTR of 0.48 °C. These results suggest that small-scale urban encroachment within 50 meters of a station can have important impacts on daily temperature extrema (maximum and minimum) with the magnitude of these differences dependent upon prevailing environmental conditions and sensing technology.​

​

What does that mean? cities are warmer than rural areas?

 

[phrodeau]

There are nuclear reactors that don't generate weapons grade nuclear material.

The enrichment of nuclear fuel produces depleted uranium, which gets used for military ammunition.

 

[Klinkster]

So is that reason to not use nuclear power in the US?

The enrichment of nuclear fuel produces depleted uranium, which gets used for military ammunition.

 

[phrodeau]

So is that reason to not use nuclear power in the US?

Whut??

 

[Klinkster]

Simple.

You seem to be looking for reasons NOT to use nuclear power, and ignoring the reasons that we should.

Whut??

 

[gunthernehmen]

The enrichment of nuclear fuel produces depleted uranium, which gets used for military ammunition.

Invariably LOL

So if we go all in with nuclear power, then the supply of depleted uranium will be far more than we need for that, which means the percentage of used fuel that goes toward that purpose will be far LOWER.

So it is in your hoplophobic best interests to encourage the increased use of nuclear power.