Great Global Warming Swindle (Ch4 last night)

[supernova]

The world and human kind are heading for disaster, we just don't know when it's going to be. But it's coming, some time. And then we'll all be cosmic dust. Makes you wonder why we bother

The meaning of life is an elusive concept that has been the subject of much philosophical, scientific and theological speculation and ,errrr ............s.o.d it ,i'm with you guys. :laughing6:

The answer is 32.6

[saturn5]

Witty,very witty :laughing3: :laughing5:

[MartinB]

In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular :sunny:

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

Heavy water has extra hydrogen (as in H6 not H2). The Germans made it in the war in Norway for purposes unknown and the allies were so worried that the resistance blew the ferry it being carried on. (they made a film - the heroes of Telemark - about it. I once washed my car not far from the spot using water from the lake. Didn't help the mpg though.

Well no, actually. Heavy water is water with heavy hydrogen in it. Deuterium (or even Tritium) is an isotope of hydrogen. Heavy water wa used as a moderator in nuclear reactors, so there was a good reason for the allies to want rid of it.

Kaptain Klevtsov

[Sam Bo]

Fusion power is the solution to Peak Oil and Climate Change. However I wonder if there is any truth in the Helium-3 theory on the moon (he says tongue firmly in cheek)

[darditti]

Not much of a solution if it doesn't exist (in usable form).

David

[saturn5]

Might as well concentrate on the dilithium crystals.

[saturn5]

We should have gone nuclear on a much larger scale decades ago.The thing that really bugs me is in 1994 they shut down the Prototype Fast Reactor at Dounreay as the Government withdrew financial support for the nuclear development programme,the reactor had always run like a dream,the problem was always the steam side of the plant but eventually these problems were ironed out and the PFR started producing electricity,running trouble free and for the first time making money and you would think paving the way for massive commercial reactors to be built.Alas they put an end to the programme after proving the system worked which to me made a total mockery of years of research,you know,pump millions into developing a system,prove it works and then...wait for it...yes,scrap the whole thing,

14 years later and what is the goverment going to do,,,yep, invest in a new nuclear power programme.

[supernova]

Is it true they [GOV] are building a Coal fired power station in Kent?

Bernie. :D

[supernova]

We should have gone nuclear on a much larger scale decades ago.The thing that really bugs me is in 1994 they shut down the Prototype Fast Reactor at Dounreay as the Government withdrew financial support for the nuclear development programme,the reactor had always run like a dream,the problem was always the steam side of the plant but eventually these problems were ironed out and the PFR started producing electricity,running trouble free and for the first time making money and you would think paving the way for massive commercial reactors to be built.Alas they put an end to the programme after proving the system worked which to me made a total mockery of years of research,you know,pump millions into developing a system,prove it works and then...wait for it...yes,scrap the whole thing,

14 years later and what is the goverment going to do,,,yep, invest in a new nuclear power programme.

IS it cheap?

[Kai]

Is it true they [GOV] are building a Coal fired power station in Kent?

Bernie. :D

No..

There has been a planning application to redevelop a existing Coal powerstation by EON energy.This was passed by the local council but passed onto the relevent goverment department for final approval.

Typical media blowing a simple story to the extreme.

[supernova]

Typical

Thanks Kai, that slowed me down a bit

Bernie.

[saturn5]

Unfortunately Bernie it aint cheap.but it is "green",even the Green Party cant argue against that but it isn't their solution because of the nuclear waste storage problem,also some people have a fear of all things radioactive,fuelled by the medias doomsday senario style reporting on anything nuclear.

Yes I remember Chernobyl and when things go wrong it can be MEGA bad,but listening to the experts,we are running out of time.

There are almost 450 commercial nuclear reactors in 30 countries producing some 16% or thereabouts of the worlds electricity.

France and Lithuania get 75% of their power from nuclear energy.

8 other european countries get around 33%,Belgium,Bulgaria,Hungary,Slovakia,Sweden,Switzerland,and the Ukraine.

Germany and Finland get 25%

Britain is 19%,so there is quite a bit of support in other countries,especially France.

Now this is where i think things get mucked up.

The debate about how much carbon is used to build something new that it may not be worth building it.A bit like the arguement about buying a new fuel efficient car or keep your old banger and thus "save on the carbon it would take to build a new car,err something along that lines anyway,plese feel free to explain it to me because i dont buy/get it.

[Sam]

World Uranium production will not be able to meet the demand from new stations coming on line. Fission generation is not the panacea some think it is, it's merely a temporary arrangement (albeit an expensive one). World uranium supplies aren't infinite either - mining is very unpopular in the countries that do it and there's some suggestion that world reserves will be used up in about 50 years if projected demand materialises. Hurry up Fusion power I say! or we could all use a bit less power!

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

The debate about how much carbon is used to build something new that it may not be worth building it.A bit like the arguement about buying a new fuel efficient car or keep your old banger and thus "save on the carbon it would take to build a new car,err something along that lines anyway,plese feel free to explain it to me because i dont buy/get it.

The deal is that with a car, more energy is used (therefore more carbon emissions) in making it than it uses in driving around for the next ten years. The production of the steel to make it, to make the tooling needed to make it, to heat the factory where it is made, to ship the parts and the finished car to where the stuff needs to go etc. is a huge problem for energy useage.

With a nuclear facility you have the same deal with the steel for the pressure vessel, the pipes, the turbines etc. but add to the fact that a lot of the building is concrete and there's the rub. The cement for making concrete comes from baking stone at a very high temperature (ie loads of carbon emissions) where CO2 is baked out of the stone to turn it from stone into cement.

With either a car or a nuclear power plant, there is a shed load of carbon footprint before it even starts to work.

Kaptain Klevtsov

[saturn5]

World Uranium production will not be able to meet the demand from new stations coming on line. Fission generation is not the panacea some think it is, it's merely a temporary arrangement (albeit an expensive one). World uranium supplies aren't infinite either - mining is very unpopular in the countries that do it and there's some suggestion that world reserves will be used up in about 50 years if projected demand materialises. Hurry up Fusion power I say! or we could all use a bit less power!

Maybe the fast breeder is the answer.Fussion power is somewhere in the (distant ?) future so something has to be done now or in the near future,we cant just wait for fussion to come along.

KK,I get what your saying about the energy being used to make steel,cement etc.Any large engineering undertaking is going to end in large carbon emmissions,what i'm getting at is how do you get around that,you cant make anything without using energy so would building a fast breeder reactor with its massive costs/carbon footprint before a single kw is produced be a viable proposition given the fact that once it is built it is greener than a green thing from Greenland.

Having worked on the reactor/sodium/heat exchanger side of things for 15 odd years and witnessing the massive engineering process taking place 1st hand it would be a major dissapointment to me if in the near future nothing like it took place again(purely selfish reasons).It really was a severe blow to the community up here when after years of experimenting and finally getting success that it should all count for nothing.mind you there are more people working there now for decommissioning than there ever was when it worked,never knew there were so many "safety case" people on the planet.

[Vega]

Unless businesses react to this recent European (20% renewalbles by 2020?) thingy really positively and invest in new research/alternatives, I cannot see the world bothering to do enough. Ecenomics and money (dare I say greed?) always seems to come first.

Once the oceans rise by a few more degrees and release the huge stores of methane under the pacific... A chain of events is started and were stuffed.... Welcome to Venus II !

Matt

[Becky]

Unless businesses react to this recent European (20% renewalbles by 2020?) thingy really positively and invest in new research/alternatives, I cannot see the world bothering to do enough. Ecenomics and money (dare I say greed?) always seems to comes first.

Once the oceans rise by a few more degrees and release the huge stores of methane under the pacific... A chain of events is started and were stuffed.... Welcome to Venus II !

Matt

Wow, is that likely / predicted? A runaway greenhouse effect? Scary!

Peace and Clear Skies.

Becky.

[Sam Bo]

Well said Vega!

Its a shame that we havent reached the global consensus that the environment = economics. All of the goods and services we are dependent on come from the environment. We live in a closed system. The Stern report was the first to point out that by continuing as 'business as usual' will cost more in the long run than reducing emissions. When we talk of the 'environment' today, its not the same thing as 'the environment' that hippies, greenpeace and friends of the earth went on about in the 70s and 80s (i.e. species declines, whales etc). We understand now how totally dependent on the environment we are and unfortunately we aint gonna realise it as a community until we are either freezing our butts off, choking to death, starving or drowning. We actually need 100 % renewables. But reductions in emissions wont do it. Actually we need sinks for the extra CO2 we have already put in the atmosphere. Maybe a giant reverse vacuum cleaner that can force it out of our bubble into space! (hmm...wasnt Richard Branson offering £20 million for ideas!)

So..the dinosaurs with their small brains may turn out to be more successful than us.

Well...i hope we can prove that statement wrong by having the foresight to change our ways..although it probably is too late.

[Tiny]

The dinosaurs didn't have polititians to decide for them - lucky them!

[Neon]

Here's a few things that we can do without that pollute the planet:

Private jets

Huge mansions

Movies

So why do so many movie stars jet around the world from mansion to mansion telling us to reduce our carbon footprint? Even they think that it's somebody else's problem. The Red Hot Chili Peppers had a rant about 'fat cats' putting profit before the environment at Live Earth, shortly before they flew back to the states in their Lear Jet. What do they think that makes them?

Bah! I'm becoming a right miserable old codger! I'll be complaining about teenagers haircuts next (which to be frank are awful).

[Tiny]

Me - I've got a boat. 2 months chugging on that is about the same carbon usage as someone driving from London to Birmingham.

[Becky]

Any Geologists on the list?

I have always wondered why here (Europe in general) we don't use geothermal power like they do in Iceland. Is the earths crust thicker here or is there another reason?

Peace and Clear Skies.

Becky.

[supernova]

What ever happend to the methane problem and the ozone hole?

I thought we were heading for another ice age some years ago :scratch:.

All the forrests need saving. Plant more trees.

A programme sometime ago on N geographic a statement was made that there is less C02

now than at any time in history.

To be honest I don't know what to believe.

What about the fallout from all the A bomb tests,

Smog,

Oil spills,

Wood pollution in Brighton,

All major problems that seem to have gone away

If big engine cars are a problem then hit the Makers not the drivers :nono:

A car has caused more pollution in its making eg paint, plastics, steel work, tyres, etc

than it will ever chuck out its exhaust in its life.

The atmosphere is 80 odd % NO2.

Bernie.

[Tiny]

But all that was last week's news. To sell papers you must find the latest sensation. And, don't forget there are millions of people who read 'The Sun' and of them many more will believe the life on Mars story than Stargazers has members. It all comes down to 'It ain't what you know it's who you believe (this week)'.