Author Topic: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading  (Read 87771 times)

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #285 on: January 23, 2016, 06:53:38 AM »
Well Chernobyl didn't happen again. Fukushima was due to natural disaster, not man made.

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #286 on: January 23, 2016, 06:54:34 AM »
 :lol "stuffushima" 

No, stuff you, shima.

Offline Stalin

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Close your mouth pls, we are not a codfish
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #287 on: January 23, 2016, 10:12:08 AM »
Natural disaster in japan

Yeah who saw that comming
Then he grabbed two chopsticks and stuck them in his mouth , pretending to be a walrus

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #288 on: January 23, 2016, 10:51:59 AM »
Yep, who would have thunk maintaining a nuclear reactor on a major earthquake fault line (built to 1967 standards) and practically on the beach front, in the home of tsunamis, as a safe idea?

We should build more, preferably in tornado alley and on the side of volcanoes.

After all,
We are not goin to cut Emissions by not going nuclear. that is a proven and safe energy source available right now.[quote/]
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #289 on: January 23, 2016, 11:49:14 AM »
That doesn't mean nuclear power isn't safe though. Not much can survive extreme natural disasters like that and since Australia doesn't have to worry about earthquakes or tsunamis we are perfectly suited to host one or two. Only reason we don't is so we don't is because too many pockets are lined by coal. Throughout the entire history of nuclear power there has only been one INES rated at 7 which was Chernobyl, and that was due to operators switching off failsafes to push the reactor. stuffushima is ranked 7 but that's only as an incident and was out of their control. It had nothing to do with being nuclear, it was also unlucky that measures in place to prevent such an incident were also knocked out. Seperate reactors were rated at different INES magnitudes, lowest 3 and highest 5. All previous incidents have been 4 or less which the effects are only local and non-threatening.

There is an unfair stigma surrounding nuclear power. Two major meltdowns in a century and less fatalities than from gas bottle explosions in workplaces every year. Radiation outside of the wavelengths we are use to (don't forget we are pounded with harmful wavelengths from our own sun everyday too) can be harmful but right now you're more likely to get sick from drinking water from Flint (Michigan) than swimming in Pripyat or stuffushima. Ever watch River Monsters on Discovery? The bloke was fishing in the cooling pond looking for some fabled giant cat fish. I agree that disasters involving nuclear power can be catastrophic but they're just so uncommon and as technology gets better they're even more unlikely.

My only concern at the moment concerning nuclear is the storage of waste.

Offline Stalin

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Close your mouth pls, we are not a codfish
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #290 on: January 23, 2016, 01:44:27 PM »
Building a nuke plant where there is a high chance of earthquake godzilla tsunami is not safe
Then he grabbed two chopsticks and stuck them in his mouth , pretending to be a walrus

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #291 on: January 23, 2016, 02:50:04 PM »
They've had earthquakes before and it has withstood them. Radiactive fallout, coal mine fires, what doesn't have a risk attached?

Offline Stalin

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Close your mouth pls, we are not a codfish
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #292 on: January 23, 2016, 03:16:16 PM »
Given the islands location around the ring of fire and the predicted future Tectonic plates activity, and the known outcomes of nuclear accidents its not a good mix. Some sources say too, the stuffusima*  fallout is really bad and yet not reported in the media.


* lol
Then he grabbed two chopsticks and stuck them in his mouth , pretending to be a walrus

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #293 on: January 23, 2016, 07:17:55 PM »
They've had earthquakes before and it has withstood them. Radiactive fallout, coal mine fires, what doesn't have a risk attached?

Solar? Wind? Biomass?
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #294 on: January 23, 2016, 09:47:17 PM »
Great for lighting and heating water but not much else.

I'm all for panels on every single house and building but still need something more substantial for things like fridges, air, etc anything with a motor.

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #295 on: January 23, 2016, 10:19:25 PM »
Great for lighting and heating water but not much else.

I'm all for panels on every single house and building but still need something more substantial for things like fridges, air, etc anything with a motor.

Maybe 5 years ago
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #296 on: January 23, 2016, 10:58:45 PM »
False Dooksie. You can't run motors off that sort of supply. Unless you know something I don't when I've been in electric motors and machinery for 13 years.

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17893
  • Proud Gang of Four member #albomustgo
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #297 on: January 24, 2016, 12:05:16 AM »
Pentti Likola.... :shh
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #298 on: January 24, 2016, 09:59:10 AM »
False Dooksie. You can't run motors off that sort of supply. Unless you know something I don't when I've been in electric motors and machinery for 13 years.

I might be missing something, but recharge a Chevy Bolt (or similar) from the grid which is supplied by that sort of supply?
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: Contoversial Topic #1 - Global Warming & Carbon Emissions Trading
« Reply #299 on: January 24, 2016, 01:33:18 PM »
It's more complicate than that but I'll try. Those are torque or traction motors in axles similar to those in trains. They're on a DC supply delivered by a charge from a capacitor that is powered from a high current 110v/240v supply. A typical solar panel meters around 12v DC after about an hour in direct sunlight with a current fit for not much other than powering a light. As you run them into an inverter for AC and a usuable voltage you lose current. Chemical cells are fixed around that too, if you meter your car battery you will get around 14v DC but that is recharged via a generator. Low load bearing single phase motors like fans and such might only pull half an amp at no load but any motor will take around 6 times its full load current on start up. So even the little pedestal fan you got from Kmart for $10 will takes around 3 amps to start up the a steady steam of 0.5A. Often a pool pump for example will be put on a 15A circuit with a type D breaker due to full load exceeding the standard 10A rating of a single phase power circuit on a type C breaker. The your oven (if electric) is already on its own 36A circuit. These are just currents you can't get off DC cell supply. Sorry if it seems like a tangent but trying to list examples why current technology just cant do it. This isn't even touching on 3phase supply which is required for industry.

To generate the power we need it can be done in a number of ways by using a turbine but it's all the same. You have permanent magnets set up in a stator housing. They are transferring flux north to south. A wound/conductive rotor (armature) goes through the middle. Turning it literally 'cuts' the flux which produces an AC voltage. It can be done in any way by using wind, water (hydro), steam (burning coal or running water over a hot radioactive core), but it's the constant generation that keeps things running that cells aren't capable of. Another thing too is that voltage drops over distance. The massive lines you see coming cross country from a plant to a city are carrying around 250-260k V AC. It is stepped down at sub stations then the trannies on the poles you see around are maintaining a steady 220-240v.

I'm all for clean energy too by the way. IMO it would be cheaper for the government to put panels on every roof than to build any sort of new plant. That way we aren't burning coal just to turn a light or TV on or hear water which sounds ridiculous. Then we would only be using coal to turn on things like air cons and use fridges. We could probably do this off wind farms but industry will need something more substantial. We may or may not have blown pole fuses in the past running up motors in our workshop :whistle there are some motors as big as a two story house used on crushers at the mines, good luck powering that off anything else.