- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Andrew Yang wants Thorium Reactors by 2027
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:25 am
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:25 am
Yang of course is an afterthought in the election for the dems but I do think that he has a few forward thinking ideas
I do like the idea of exploring thorium reactor tech
https://www.wired.com/story/andrew-yang-wants-a-thorium-reactor-by-2027-good-luck-buddy/
Of course all of the leftists pile on him for having good ideas like this. We should absolutely be investing research into this technology.
The date to have them on the grid is pretty aggressive considering the tech needs to be refined and the permitting/construction process of said facilities will take years. That being said I like the idea.
That being said the green energy movement has a fairly powerful lobby and their PR and misinformation campaigns are strong. The truth of the matter is that while green tech like solar and wind have their place, those places are few and far between. And the expansion of nuclear tech would just make these "renewable" forms of energy not needed.
This was highlighted in an article I believe I had posted in a previous thread although I can't find it at the moment. I'll post the article again here as I think it's a good read.
The real reason they hate nuclear is because it means we don't need renewables
This tongue in cheek jab in the first paragraph is the highlight of the article
I do like the idea of exploring thorium reactor tech
https://www.wired.com/story/andrew-yang-wants-a-thorium-reactor-by-2027-good-luck-buddy/
Of course all of the leftists pile on him for having good ideas like this. We should absolutely be investing research into this technology.
quote:
Yet of all Yang’s futuristic policies, one in particular stands out for its uniqueness and specificity. To transition the United States from fossil fuels to green energy, Yang wants the government to invest $50 billion in the development of thorium molten-salt nuclear reactors—and he wants them on the grid by 2027.
The date to have them on the grid is pretty aggressive considering the tech needs to be refined and the permitting/construction process of said facilities will take years. That being said I like the idea.
That being said the green energy movement has a fairly powerful lobby and their PR and misinformation campaigns are strong. The truth of the matter is that while green tech like solar and wind have their place, those places are few and far between. And the expansion of nuclear tech would just make these "renewable" forms of energy not needed.
This was highlighted in an article I believe I had posted in a previous thread although I can't find it at the moment. I'll post the article again here as I think it's a good read.
The real reason they hate nuclear is because it means we don't need renewables
quote:
Why is it that, from the U.S. and Canada to Spain and France, it is progressives and socialists who say they care deeply about the climate, not conservative climate skeptics, who are seeking to shut down nuclear plants?
After all, the two greatest successes when it comes to nuclear energy are Sweden and France, two nations held up by democratic socialists for decades as models of the kind of societies they want.
It is only nuclear energy, not solar and wind, that has radically and rapidly decarbonized energy supplies while increasing wages and growing societal wealth.
This tongue in cheek jab in the first paragraph is the highlight of the article
quote:
But ignorance can’t be the whole story. After all, the leaders of the anti-nuclear movement are public intellectuals — Al Gore, Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein. They are highly-educated, do extensive research, and publish in fact-checked publications like The New Yorker, The Nation, The New York Times.
Is the problem that progressives unconsciously associate nuclear energy with nuclear bombs? Without a doubt that’s a big part of it. Psychologists have since the seventies documented how people displace anxieties about the bomb onto nuclear plants.
But anti-nuclear Millennials like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 29, grew up more in fear of climate change than the bomb.
And few things have proven worse for the climate than shutting down nuclear plants.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:29 am to Powerman
Yang is one of the few Dems who actually has a platform instead of just impeach Trump.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:29 am to Powerman
Yang is too far right for the dems, too left for the new GOP. . .
He could be a fantastic president, were he to have a GOP Congress to rein him in.
He could be a fantastic president, were he to have a GOP Congress to rein him in.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:30 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
Yang is one of the few Dems who actually has a platform instead of just impeach Trump.
And while I don't agree with a lot of his platform he does have some ideas that are probably going to need to be addressed in the future.
He's the only one that I would consider "progressive" in the non politicized meaning of the word. He actually does have some forward thinking ideas that should at least be considered.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:33 am to Roaad
quote:
He could be a fantastic president, were he to have a GOP Congress to rein him in.
GOP congress is no more conservative than Jill fricking Stein
The GOP had plenty of control during the first 6 years of the GWB presidency and all they did was expand the shite out of government at every turn.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:33 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
Yang is one of the few Dems who actually has a platform instead of just impeach Trump.
Yeah, he is not a complete lunatic so naturally he will not get the nomination.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:35 am to rich4pres
quote:
Yeah, he is not a complete lunatic so naturally he will not get the nomination.
I've talked to some pretty partisan leftists and they say they don't want anything to do with him because he's another billionaire businessman like Trump.
But their problem with Trump shouldn't be the fact that he was a billionaire businessman. It should be policy based.
The class envy and the odd pining for a career politician by leftists is very illogical.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:35 am to Powerman
His views on automation are spot on imo. He has a lot of support on this issue from those on the libertarian spectrum. The rise of big tech and the surveillance state, coupled with the future potential for mass unemployment in the manufacturing and service sectors, really lend itself to a dystopian future.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:40 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
His views on automation are spot on imo. He has a lot of support on this issue from those on the libertarian spectrum. The rise of big tech and the surveillance state, coupled with the future potential for mass unemployment in the manufacturing and service sectors, really lend itself to a dystopian future.
Particularly when you figure that the savings rate in the middle class is already abysmal. If the masses get displaced by automation they won't have much of a safety net to rely on.
I do think as history has shown us that new jobs usually replace the old jobs. I just don't know how long that trend will continue.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:44 am to SCLibertarian
President Anti would push harder for Fuel Cell technology..can't go wrong with potable water exhaust we could stand for more hydrogen stations.
We need to push harder for fusion power it might be 20-25 years away but a crash program might solve it sooner. That would solve our power needs for good. Renewables are never going to be economically feasible because you have to have those ugly windmills and solar farms.
We need to push harder for fusion power it might be 20-25 years away but a crash program might solve it sooner. That would solve our power needs for good. Renewables are never going to be economically feasible because you have to have those ugly windmills and solar farms.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:44 am to Powerman
quote:Sure. But they are the opposition party.
GOP congress is no more conservative than Jill fricking Stein
I am a strong believer in congress being the opposite party from the president.
Seems to work great. 80's Reagan, 90's Clinton, Obama, and now Trump.
Party-based blank checks for presidents tend to turn bad for America.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:50 am to Powerman
quote:
Yang of course is an afterthought in the election for the dems but I do think that he has a few forward thinking ideas
That’s what I don’t get about the Democrats. They all want to cling to people with well-proven failed wacky ideas. Why not give someone a shot with yet untested wacky ideas instead?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:51 am to Powerman
quote:
Yang of course is an afterthought in the election for the dems but I do think that he has a few forward thinking ideas
I do like the idea of exploring thorium reactor tech
OP, I like the idea also but...
The problem we have right now is a flat demand for power, not more interesting ways to generate it.
I can't speak for my employer (the power company) but I'd venture to state we'll be in slight contraction by 2027.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:51 am to Roaad
quote:
Sure. But they are the opposition party.
I am a strong believer in congress being the opposite party from the president.
Seems to work great. 80's Reagan, 90's Clinton, Obama, and now Trump.
Party-based blank checks for presidents tend to turn bad for America.
I get what you're saying. I just don't know that the GOP had much of a backbone in dealing with Obama. It worked great with Clinton.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 10:52 am to captainFid
quote:
OP, I like the idea also but...
The problem we have right now is a flat demand for power, not more interesting ways to generate it.
I can't speak for my employer (the power company) but I'd venture to state we'll be in slight contraction by 2027.
I'm not sure where you are getting your information but it's wrong
And part of the idea of this is to displace existing facilities with cleaner facilities
i.e. displace coal fired plants with nuclear
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:02 am to Powerman
quote:
Thorium
Interesting...
So it has been foretold
Would y’all get behind universal basic income if we had unlimited resources/free time?
https://www.reddit.com/r/new_american_system/about
Introduction
This sub is a place to discuss how America can return to its promise as The City On A Hill. This means a central bank designed to benefit all citizens, advanced infrastructure, space exploration, peaceful cooperation with the world, and production instead of usury and empire-building.
This sub is not only nonpartisan, we are anti-partisan. We strongly encourage you to stop identifying with any political party or ideology, and start evaluating every policy idea on its own merit.
We want to encourage users to submit their ideas, so please refrain from downvoting posts.
Who We Were
The American System
American School of Economics
First Bank of the United States
Second Bank of the United States
National Road
Transcontinental Railroad
Interstate Highway System
Tennessee Valley Authority
Akosombo Dam (cooperation betwen US and Ghana)
Advanced Nuclear Reactor Prototype from the 1950s
Successful Long-term test of Advanced Nuclear Reactor in the 1960s
Who We Will Be
Transportation
Maglev
Hyperloop
Space Access and Exploration
r/IsaacArthur
Non-Rocket Space Launch
Space Elevator
Orbital Ring (space elevator that can be built today)
Launch Loop
Sky Hook
Space-Based Solar
Asteroid Mining
Advanced Nuclear
Thorium Power
Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor
Thorium Cheaper Than Coal
Thorium for half the cost of coal
Hydro-Engineering
North American Water and Power Alliance
Potential Partners
BRICS Development Bank
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
WWJD
Cleansing of the Temple
List of Bible Verses Forbidding Usury
—-
https://www.reddit.com/domain/newfederalistpapers.joomla.com/
HLI...
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:04 am to Powerman
This is actually smart thinking.
Renewable power alone will not get it done.
Renewable power alone will not get it done.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:07 am to TrueTiger
quote:
This is actually smart thinking.
Renewable power alone will not get it done.
Correct. And all of the battery infrastructure that is needed for renewable grid energy to be effective might be better served in vehicles. If you want to reduce carbon emissions you have to acknowledge that a lot of batteries will be required. Wouldn't it be preferable to have those batteries in cars instead of in massive battery banks to store solar/wind energy that can't always produce instantaneous power?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:09 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Thorium Reactors by 2027
And I want to plow Katie Pavlich tonight.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:15 am to Powerman
Thats nice Andy....does work anywhere it's tried, but at least it's really expensive.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News