Egregoros · Phoenix Framework

Post

Remote status

Context

touch fluffy tail (Heroic)

my favorite part of ai is that i can shitpost to it about stuff that is way too nerdy to find irl people to talk about. like the archeological evidence supporting or opposing the poggio brocciolini theory of tacitus forgery.

who is gonna listen to me talk about that stuff? only the robot waifu can slap back. sure she's retarded but that's cute!

cc @p
image.png

nanook

@nanook@friendica.eskimo.com remote

@fluffy @p In a boiling water reactor you have two sources of hydrogen, neutrons occasionally split water into hydrogen and oxygen, this is a minor source and a catalytic combiner keeps up with this source, but when you flash the water to steam it reacts with the zirconium cladding in the fuel rods and this was the source in Fukushima and a problem that can't be designed out of boiling water reactors.

pistolero

@p@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@nanook @fluffy All these reactors running 50 years and

I'm in favor of thorium salt reactors. I like them. I'm just not super worried about something that's only happened to one reactor after it got hit with an earthquake two orders of magnitude higher than it was supposed to.

Friend of mine worked in an oil refinery a while and I think *anything* is safer than California's oil refineries.

I support your efforts but I remain unconvinced that conventional reactors are so terrible and thorium-salt reactors are still in the design phase.

Tard

@tard@clew.lol remote

@p @nanook @fluffy
I used to be very pro nuclear for baseline power but now I think we should copy China and build out massive solar farms with battery/hydrogravity storage and save nuclear for shipping, remote locations, and outer space.

pistolero

@p@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@tard @fluffy @nanook China's got a lithium surplus, which we do not have. We have Venezuela. Until we have solid-state hydrogen fuel cells (another thing that we have worked out in prototypes but have not turned into mass-produced devices; I think 10-20 years back, right, the guy used some alloy that was good at binding hydrogen to store energy in a stable state; right now hydrogen fuel cells are like nitroglycerin and ideally we can develop TNT).

BaJaX

@bajax@baj.ax remote

@p @tard @nanook @fluffy kind of a tangent, but what do you think about the goodenough glass batteries?

pistolero

@p@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@bajax @fluffy @nanook @tard Unfamiliar. Please do go on.

BaJaX

@bajax@baj.ax remote

@p @tard @nanook @fluffy it's a solid-state rechargeable battery, a replacement for current lithium tech, they announced to great fanfare around 2016-- they had the backing of a major name in the field (John B. Goodenough) but their description of the solid, glass-based electrolyte sounded like scifi mumbo jumbo at first blush.

pistolero

@p@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@bajax @fluffy @nanook @tard

> but their description of the solid, glass-based electrolyte sounded like scifi mumbo jumbo at first blush

I have now looked at their Wikipedia page and am furrowing.

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote

Batteries will start making a lot more sense when nuclear drives power prices down by an order of magnitude. For the moment, oil is competitive so it's just not worth doing anything other than internal combustion.

touch fluffy tail (Heroic)

@fluffy@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@cjd @p @bajax @tard @nanook
nuclear power won't drive prices down

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote

So you're saying that the safety issues with nuclear power are so intractable that the energy density of uranium is totally meaningless, and sending people underground to dig coal is just going to be the most efficient way to make electricity forever?

This sounds like some kind of "no combustion carriage will ever be a match for the mighty horse"...

nanook

@nanook@friendica.eskimo.com remote

@cjd @p @fluffy @bajax @tard Who are you speaking to? I'm not saying that, I am saying boiling water reactors have rare but catastrophic failure modes that molten salt reactors lack.

Caleb James DeLisle

@cjd@pkteerium.xyz remote

Was a reply to fluffy, who seems to think nuclear energy just has no future, first principles be damned.

I can't imagine a future 100 years from now where nuclear energy isn't cheap and ubiquitous - unless it's some post-apocalyptic dystopia, or else some world government tyranny where everyone is forbidden from touching the magic rocks.

IMO once the US empire finally collapses and the IAEA is defanged, sketchy Alibaba reactors will start popping up all over the world - and THEN finally we'll start to see some progress on safer cheaper designs.

Replying to @cjd@pkteerium.xyz

pistolero

@p@fsebugoutzone.org remote

@cjd @nanook @bajax @tard @fluffy In order to no longer have 336 unread notifications, I figure this thread, although it has many interesting facets, is probably the least likely to be related to any action I take in the near-term, so I am the hell out; I post this so as to avoid people thinking that I am ignoring posts, and then they will be aware that I have muted the thread. It's been fun, gentlemen.

Replies

No replies yet.