News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by rayiner on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @11:07PM (#26420081)
I’m incredibly depressed about renewables. They’re a dead end technology for a civilization in decline—one cutting energy usage rather than exponentially increasing it to make wonderful things possible. You’ll never power a starship with windmills. Why can’t we bring down the price on nuclear instead of giving up?
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by pfdietz on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @02:41PM (#26571311)
> I’m incredibly depressed about renewables. They’re a dead end technology for a civilization in decline

Solar could supply civilization with more energy than fission or fusion (in manmade reactors) ever could. The Sun will produce orders of magnitude more energy than totally fusing all the deuterium or fissioning all the uranium and thorium in the solar system could provide. Far from being a sign of a civilization in decline, the triumph of renewables would be a signpost on the way to becoming a Kardashev 2 civilization that can fully exploit the energy resources of the solar system.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by adrianN on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @11:35PM (#26420290)
If we wanted to we could cover the Sahara with solar panels and have several times more electricity than we know what to do with.

The important shift btw is not from coal and nuclear to renewables, it's from fossil fuels for heating and transportation and industry to electricity. If we figure out how to build fusion power plants safely for cheap in a few decades, we will already have set up our infrastructure to run on electricity instead on carbon. Cutting energy usage is just a nice side effect of switching from 30% efficient ICEs to 80% efficient electric cars and from heating with gas to heating with a heat pump.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by whoooooo123 on Thursday March 11, 2021 @02:09AM (#26421175)
> If we wanted to we could cover the Sahara with solar panels and have several times more electricity than we know what to do with.

Do we have enough rare-Earth minerals to build this many solar panels? What do we do with the panels when they reach the end of their lifecycle twenty years from now? What do we do when it's nighttime in the Sahara?

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by adrianN on Thursday March 11, 2021 @02:18AM (#26421239)
Panels are almost exclusively sand by weight. When panels are at the end of their life we either recycle them into new panels or simply store them somewhere. They're not particularly difficult to store safely. Right now there is not much recycling going on because there simply isn't the volume of old panels available to make this interesting from an economic perspective.

To cover nights in the Sahara we use some of the absurd excess energy we get from covering the whole desert to make some Hydrogen or Methane and convert that back to electricity. If we don't want PV and gas synthesis for some reason to we can also just store heat in molten salt in solar-thermal installations and drive steam turbines. That's just a bit more expensive than PV today.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by imtringued on Thursday March 11, 2021 @03:41AM (#26421745)
https://imgur.com/QwKBMvn

I'm not sure why rare Earth minerals would be a bottleneck. They aren't rare in the element abundance sense, just uneconomical to extract, which is why they are being extracted in countries where human rights violations are happening all the time.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by pfdietz on Thursday March 11, 2021 @08:24PM (#26431235)
Why does this canard about rare earths in PV show up in the comments to every one of these nuclear posts? Where did you hear this, and why did you believe it?
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by baybal2 on Thursday March 11, 2021 @07:04AM (#26423129)
> Do we have enough rare-Earth minerals to build this many solar panels?

The are no rare-Earth minerals in silicon solar cells.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by whoooooo123 on Sunday March 14, 2021 @09:47AM (#26455373)
D'oh. TIL
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by philipkglass on Thursday March 11, 2021 @04:25PM (#26429189)
There have been thousands of satellites and dozens of space probes powered by solar electricity. Space missions out to the orbit of Jupiter can be powered by solar PV (Juno probe). Actual fission reactors have never gone beyond Earth orbit.

Very deep space missions can't use solar power due to the inverse square fall-off of light from the sun, but even those don't use nuclear reactors. They use radioisotope thermal generators powered by radioactive decay. RTGs don't have any moving parts and can run for decades without maintenance.

I think it's astonishing and delightfully living-in-the-future that solar cells -- once so expensive that only space missions could justify their cost -- are now manufactured by the square kilometer and cheap enough to "farm" electricity here on Earth. If you're pondering speculative technologies of the future, a solar collecting Dyson swarm could provide more energy than all the fissionable materials in the solar system.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by garmaine on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @11:37PM (#26420302)
I am pro nuclear, but it is actually SpaceX’s plan to fuel Starship with methane produced by offshore wind power.
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by MertsA on Thursday March 11, 2021 @09:25PM (#26431593)
Source? Because I believe the most they've said is that they'll offset enough generation to make up for the natural gas used by starship. The sabatier process on Earth is even more troublesome than on Mars due to the trace amounts of atmospheric CO2. Even with the thin atmosphere on Mars there's literally more CO2 in a cubic meter of Martian air than in a cubic meter of terrestrial air.
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by garmaine on Thursday March 11, 2021 @11:59PM (#26432361)
Elon said so on Twitter. Google will probably find it for you.
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by absove on Thursday March 11, 2021 @04:07AM (#26421897)
The civilization in decline is the one that destroys the environment in order to build spaceships.

Not that so-called renewables will actually solve that, cutting energy usage on the other hand definitely would help.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by AtlasBarfed on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @11:20PM (#26420193)
You'll never power a starship with coal either.

That dead end technology is one of the few hopes for countering global warming and carbon emissions. And rooftop solar and EV batteries dual-purposing for distributed grid storage are complementary technologies.

"Why can't we bring down the price of nuclear" is a problem with the nuclear industry, and has nothing to do with the REVOLUTIONARY sea change that renewables represent.

And I'm a LFTR fan. Brayton cycle? 100x more available fuel that's breeded? Vastly reduced proliferation risk? "Burn" spent fuel rods? 99% fuel use? Zero meltdown risk with plug and liquid fuel? Scales down to the size of a closet? Very rapid startup/shutdown time? Container degradation was a problem, but whatever. Amazing stuff.

But LFTR and other technologies have zero chance in the open market right now with renewables plummeting in cost to the point that there exist no fossil fuels that are competitive in the marketplace.

Solar/wind is one of the few developments that are counter to our civilization sliding into a polluted, totalitarian, oppressive dystopia. Solar/Wind can enable decentralized power production in the third world, and combined with Starlink and other satellite internet webs will enable so much potential for the third world without the pseudo-oppressive nature of grid and wired communications infrastructure.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by harryh on Thursday March 11, 2021 @10:06AM (#26424756)
Solar power is becoming so cheap and plentiful that it is cheaper than free. At certain times you can literally be paid to consume it. All kinds of possibilities from that.
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by echelon on Wednesday March 10, 2021 @11:09PM (#26420100)
Ask your question to the average person and imagine their response.

It's because nobody is thinking about the starships, for better or worse. People are bad enough at dealing with today's problems.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by manicdee on Thursday March 11, 2021 @01:41AM (#26421013)
How are renewables cutting energy usage?
Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by imtringued on Thursday March 11, 2021 @03:34AM (#26421694)
They significantly reduce primary energy usage. When you generate one 1kWh in a thermal power plant you also generate an additional 1 - 2 kWH of thermal energy. So in statistics it will look like the thermal power plant produces more energy. If your city has district heating it might be a valid form of power, but right now we assume all the thermal energy is always useful and necessary which is especially bad in cars where you turn up to 70% of the energy into waste heat.

By increasing energy efficiency by a factor of 2 you easily cut down on energy usage.

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by lispm on Thursday March 11, 2021 @06:09AM (#26422745)
Nuclear power plants rarely have been used for district heating. Lot's of nuclear power plants are heating up rivers...