I read a story the other day about a small family operation that does uranium mining. It seems there isn't a lot of investment in safety or their isn't a lot of regulation. All of them die in their fifties from cancer. So do their families.
This doesn't prove anything, particularly due to the lack of the story and the idea of "a small operation" to mine uranium when uranium is strip mined.
[IMG]_ http://www.peakoil.org.au/ranger-pit1.jpg[/IMG]
EDIT: Also what country it is in.
Um. I didn't set out to "prove" anything. I was just sharing an anecdote.
I think these guys were prospecting. The story had them drilling holes at different locations with a rig in the back of their pickup truck.
I think what I meant to say was "where was this?"
If you mean where was the story, it was on NPR.
If you mean where was this taking place, I believe it was either New Mexico or some other state in the southwest. Or one of the plains states. Which doesn't narrow it down much.
Yeah, but not extraordinarily less. We're talking about such small quantities anyway. It does make the waste less radioactive, but it's most useful as a way to stretch fuel out. If that's your interest.
Uh...actually it is quite a lot less:
Once processed, two bundles totaling 528 fuel rods yield one vitrification canister 1.3 meters tall and a bit less than half a meter in diameter, plus another steel canister of similar size holding the compacted metal fuel rods. Even the largest of France’s reactors, which can produce 1300 megawatts, generate just 20 canisters of high-level waste per year. According to Areva, it’s about a factor of 10 reduction in the mass of highly radioactive waste needing to be stored under the most stringent conditions, and a four- or fivefold reduction in volume relative to leaving a plant’s spent fuel unseparated
Prove me wrong, will you? :x
I still maintain that that isn't a way of dealing with waste. See above re: holes, digging, burying, et cetera.
Yeah, but not extraordinarily less. We're talking about such small quantities anyway. It does make the waste less radioactive, but it's most useful as a way to stretch fuel out. If that's your interest.
Uh...actually it is quite a lot less:
Once processed, two bundles totaling 528 fuel rods yield one vitrification canister 1.3 meters tall and a bit less than half a meter in diameter, plus another steel canister of similar size holding the compacted metal fuel rods. Even the largest of France’s reactors, which can produce 1300 megawatts, generate just 20 canisters of high-level waste per year. According to Areva, it’s about a factor of 10 reduction in the mass of highly radioactive waste needing to be stored under the most stringent conditions, and a four- or fivefold reduction in volume relative to leaving a plant’s spent fuel unseparated
Prove me wrong, will you? :x
I still maintain that that isn't a way of dealing with waste. See above re: holes, digging, burying, et cetera.
Obviously it's a way. In what way is is not a good one? Details please.
Aren't there bacteria that actually eat plutonium and convert it into a less harmful state? With a bit of genetic engineering, we might be able to deal with the waste biologically.
Canada has a fuckton of Uranium. I think we export 30% of the world market, or something.
Our idiotic but politically unviable Green Party promises an immediate ban on the export of fissionable materials if elected. Drives me up the wall.
Hah. Same here, despite the patently obvious fact that roughly half a dozen nations would promptly invade, seeing as how we have like a third of the world's stock.
I still maintain that that isn't a way of dealing with waste. See above re: holes, digging, burying, et cetera.
I'm going to go out on limb here and offer the statement "as opposed to blowing coal waste off into the air as smoke" and "as opposed to pumping our sewage into the sea" etc.
People have been making this "it's not new" argument about nuclear waste disposal for years and it never gets more valid. It's sole intent is to try and say "well it's still radioactive" - except this much is obvious, there's not very much of it, and certainly less then is lying around underground in the environment.
Apparently the demo unit we will all see.. tomorrow *sigh*.. will be all clear 'plastic' and a few metal and magnetic parts.
I am disappointed that they missed their deadline, it just shows to me like they are stalling, which doesn't improve my already slim suspension of disbelief.
I still maintain that that isn't a way of dealing with waste. See above re: holes, digging, burying, et cetera.
I'm going to go out on limb here and offer the statement "as opposed to blowing coal waste off into the air as smoke" and "as opposed to pumping our sewage into the sea" etc.
People have been making this "it's not new" argument about nuclear waste disposal for years and it never gets more valid. It's sole intent is to try and say "well it's still radioactive" - except this much is obvious, there's not very much of it, and certainly less then is lying around underground in the environment.
Didn't I already tell you I'm not that guy? :P
Look, burying it in a hole is the only sensible way to deal with it, and it's a good, safe, effective, sustainable way. It's still burying it in a hole.
I haven't suspended my disbelief, I'm just curious as to what you build that convinces you to spend $100,000 on a full-page ad in the Economist.
Also, I like figuring out how tricks work.
In the mean time, assuming they've actually put some engineering thought into it maybe they built something similar to this device. It's a sculpture that will keep doing that for months - the two metals bits on the side are magnets and it's driven by a series of pendulums below it. The whole thing will self-tune to its natural oscillation and keep the ball going around.
It's not claimed to be perpetual motion (i.e. perpetual work generation), just a neat sculpture. Yet, on the Steorn forums there was literally like a 300 page thread where 1 guy argued endlessly that it was perpetual motion (i.e. it does work). However around page 200 it seemed like they were just talking about ramps of magnets pulling balls up and then dropping them as producing more energy then was put in.
Seriously, people are fucking insane.
EDIT: It's possible that video I linked is from someone arguing the latter, I didn't pay attention to the sound.
Also this is one of the magnet thingy's people also think generates free energy.
Canada has a fuckton of Uranium. I think we export 30% of the world market, or something.
Our idiotic but politically unviable Green Party promises an immediate ban on the export of fissionable materials if elected. Drives me up the wall.
Hah. Same here, despite the patently obvious fact that roughly half a dozen nations would promptly invade, seeing as how we have like a third of the world's stock.
This also drives me up the wall. I agree with 90% of the Democrats' policies, except for their irrational fear of nuclear power. God, it's like the last thing anybody read about nuclear power was Chernobyl.
I haven't suspended my disbelief, I'm just curious as to what you build that convinces you to spend $100,000 on a full-page ad in the Economist.
Also, I like figuring out how tricks work.
In the mean time, assuming they've actually put some engineering thought into it maybe they built something similar to this device. It's a sculpture that will keep doing that for months - the two metals bits on the side are magnets and it's driven by a series of pendulums below it. The whole thing will self-tune to its natural oscillation and keep the ball going around.
It's not claimed to be perpetual motion, just a neat sculpture. Yet, on the Steorn forums there was literally like a 300 page thread where 1 guy argued endlessly that it was perpetual motion. However around page 200 it seemed like they were just talking about ramps of magnets pulling balls up and then dropping them as producing more energy then was put in.
Seriously, people are fucking insane.
That's like David Jones' fake perpetual motion machine sculptures. He built one with a bike wheel on a platform that was on display for ages, turning the entire time, and no one could figure it out (he asks people to guess how they work, and he says a lot of engineers tend to convince themselves he built a real one). Supposedly some students got fed up of guessing and stole it for analysis, but ended up returning it without having figured it out.
It's possible that video I linked is from someone arguing the latter, I didn't pay attention to the sound.
No, it's just billed as a piece of artwork I think, but some of those comments are the funniest things I've seen today.
whether or not it has to be restarted has nothing to do with it being a perpetuum mobile. It is a perpetuum mobile because it does work without spending any kind of energy even if it works for, say, a couple of hours and then stops. Further, it is immaterial what anybody says. What matters is what the machine really does.
I don care waot you all haters say, and i don't no maths or science but this must be somethin gr8. I believe with the power of faith and this machine we can help planet
This reminds me of my friend in Physics class. He proposed the creation of a home-made catapult: two rulers would sit on either-side of a magnet, like a railgun. You'd get a small piece of metal and, using your hands, push it down the rulers against the magnet. You'd release it, and it'd fire the piece of metal out.
After he explained this, I asked him, "So what's the difference between using this catapult and, say, throwing the piece of metal?" Thankfully he's pretty intelligent, so he just laughed at his mistake.
Also this is one of the magnet thingy's people also think generates free energy.
The necessity of a human hand rather argues against that.
It does of course, but people have done stuff like put a whole lot of those in a circle so the ball goes round and round. If you do it right you can get it to go round like 10-20 times or so but eventually it always stops due to friction.
The trick in it is that people think that if a magnet isn't pulling something then it isn't acting under the influence of the magnet - the missing term in their calculations is always the work done against the magnetic field by gravity when the ball reaches the top and rolls off the end. Gravity, being a larger force does the same work in less distance, but the concept and calculations are slightly too difficult to be worthwhile (seriously, calculating magnetic attraction on a steel sphere is actually pretty complex because of course you need to assume a bar magnet and hence calculus gets involved etc. etc.).
It's possible that video I linked is from someone arguing the latter, I didn't pay attention to the sound.
No, it's just billed as a piece of artwork I think, but some of those comments are the funniest things I've seen today.
whether or not it has to be restarted has nothing to do with it being a perpetuum mobile. It is a perpetuum mobile because it does work without spending any kind of energy even if it works for, say, a couple of hours and then stops. Further, it is immaterial what anybody says. What matters is what the machine really does.
I don care waot you all haters say, and i don't no maths or science but this must be somethin gr8. I believe with the power of faith and this machine we can help planet
I also liked this one:
You guys who think free energy isn't here are really, REALLY ignorant.
You'll fall the hardest when this reality greets the masses, which it is already in the process of. For God's sakes, why can't one person argue the disclosure project is BS?! BECAUSE YOU CAN'T!!
Get over it. Let the times change, we desperately need it.
Ended up with a rating of five, that comment.
Isn't the Disclosure Project... extraterrestrials?
Also this is one of the magnet thingy's people also think generates free energy.
Now it's been awhile since I've taken an EM class, but isn't the rolling of the ball just the release of the pontential energy you store in it when you put the ball in place?
Also, looking up SMOT is fucking scary. Someone needs to introduce these people to reality.
Also this is one of the magnet thingy's people also think generates free energy.
Now it's been awhile since I've taken an EM class, but isn't the rolling of the ball just the release of the pontential energy you store in it when you put the ball in place?
the effective mass of an object increases with its speed, correct?
So, if you had two equally fat people sitting at the ends of a see-saw, and told them that they'd have to vibrate to get food resting at the bottom of the see-saw... wouldn't they each increase their own mass by alternating in their vibrations, tipping the see-saw perpetually?
(It's a shame you have to put energy into something to increase its speed. surely there's something involving magnets or resonance that'll fix that)
Kazhiim on
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
Yeah, but not extraordinarily less. We're talking about such small quantities anyway. It does make the waste less radioactive, but it's most useful as a way to stretch fuel out. If that's your interest.
Uh...actually it is quite a lot less:
Once processed, two bundles totaling 528 fuel rods yield one vitrification canister 1.3 meters tall and a bit less than half a meter in diameter, plus another steel canister of similar size holding the compacted metal fuel rods. Even the largest of France’s reactors, which can produce 1300 megawatts, generate just 20 canisters of high-level waste per year. According to Areva, it’s about a factor of 10 reduction in the mass of highly radioactive waste needing to be stored under the most stringent conditions, and a four- or fivefold reduction in volume relative to leaving a plant’s spent fuel unseparated
And if we ship all the remaining waste to France we'll have none to deal with at all.
Posts
If you mean where was the story, it was on NPR.
If you mean where was this taking place, I believe it was either New Mexico or some other state in the southwest. Or one of the plains states. Which doesn't narrow it down much.
Our idiotic but politically unviable Green Party promises an immediate ban on the export of fissionable materials if elected. Drives me up the wall.
Just screams legitimate science, doesn't it?
It's pure white and has tubes. How can it not be science?!
That's why everything on the internet is accurate.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/comments/papparticle2.html
Prove me wrong, will you? :x
I still maintain that that isn't a way of dealing with waste. See above re: holes, digging, burying, et cetera.
Hah. Same here, despite the patently obvious fact that roughly half a dozen nations would promptly invade, seeing as how we have like a third of the world's stock.
The real thing will have many more tubes.
EDIT: Also re I'm going to go out on limb here and offer the statement "as opposed to blowing coal waste off into the air as smoke" and "as opposed to pumping our sewage into the sea" etc.
People have been making this "it's not new" argument about nuclear waste disposal for years and it never gets more valid. It's sole intent is to try and say "well it's still radioactive" - except this much is obvious, there's not very much of it, and certainly less then is lying around underground in the environment.
I am disappointed that they missed their deadline, it just shows to me like they are stalling, which doesn't improve my already slim suspension of disbelief.
Didn't I already tell you I'm not that guy? :P
Look, burying it in a hole is the only sensible way to deal with it, and it's a good, safe, effective, sustainable way. It's still burying it in a hole.
Also, I like figuring out how tricks work.
In the mean time, assuming they've actually put some engineering thought into it maybe they built something similar to this device. It's a sculpture that will keep doing that for months - the two metals bits on the side are magnets and it's driven by a series of pendulums below it. The whole thing will self-tune to its natural oscillation and keep the ball going around.
It's not claimed to be perpetual motion (i.e. perpetual work generation), just a neat sculpture. Yet, on the Steorn forums there was literally like a 300 page thread where 1 guy argued endlessly that it was perpetual motion (i.e. it does work). However around page 200 it seemed like they were just talking about ramps of magnets pulling balls up and then dropping them as producing more energy then was put in.
Seriously, people are fucking insane.
EDIT: It's possible that video I linked is from someone arguing the latter, I didn't pay attention to the sound.
Also this is one of the magnet thingy's people also think generates free energy.
This also drives me up the wall. I agree with 90% of the Democrats' policies, except for their irrational fear of nuclear power. God, it's like the last thing anybody read about nuclear power was Chernobyl.
That's like David Jones' fake perpetual motion machine sculptures. He built one with a bike wheel on a platform that was on display for ages, turning the entire time, and no one could figure it out (he asks people to guess how they work, and he says a lot of engineers tend to convince themselves he built a real one). Supposedly some students got fed up of guessing and stole it for analysis, but ended up returning it without having figured it out.
It kept turning the entire time they had it.
The Youtube comments... can't... stop... reading!
After he explained this, I asked him, "So what's the difference between using this catapult and, say, throwing the piece of metal?" Thankfully he's pretty intelligent, so he just laughed at his mistake.
The trick in it is that people think that if a magnet isn't pulling something then it isn't acting under the influence of the magnet - the missing term in their calculations is always the work done against the magnetic field by gravity when the ball reaches the top and rolls off the end. Gravity, being a larger force does the same work in less distance, but the concept and calculations are slightly too difficult to be worthwhile (seriously, calculating magnetic attraction on a steel sphere is actually pretty complex because of course you need to assume a bar magnet and hence calculus gets involved etc. etc.).
I also liked this one: Ended up with a rating of five, that comment.
Isn't the Disclosure Project... extraterrestrials?
Did he drop it off on his way from Neptune to Earth, or something?
Now it's been awhile since I've taken an EM class, but isn't the rolling of the ball just the release of the pontential energy you store in it when you put the ball in place?
Also, looking up SMOT is fucking scary. Someone needs to introduce these people to reality.
So, if you had two equally fat people sitting at the ends of a see-saw, and told them that they'd have to vibrate to get food resting at the bottom of the see-saw... wouldn't they each increase their own mass by alternating in their vibrations, tipping the see-saw perpetually?
(It's a shame you have to put energy into something to increase its speed. surely there's something involving magnets or resonance that'll fix that)
I got nothing but "smot poking", and I am mildly disappointed.
Apparently they're closed right now. All I see is a light blinking on that mac, but nothing useful.
What time is it in London?
Blah, I want to see what the plastic circle does.