- 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 10:50 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 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 11:15 am to Powerman
Thats nice Andy....does work anywhere it's tried, but at least it's really expensive.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:24 am to Powerman
quote:
I do like the idea of exploring thorium reactor tech
I agree. I've been hearing about it for the last 10 years or so and it sounds like a very promising solution. The theory is that it consumes almost all the fuel after getting a jumpstart from plutonium so there's less need to handle waste spent fuel. I believe the fail safes also rely on very simple and effective designs as well. I'm sure theres a reason why it hasn't been implemented but I haven't looked into it in a while.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:29 am to Powerman
quote:And physics. It's always entertaining when someone suggest that the bounds of physics can be altered if we just "spend enough on research".
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.
Hell... if you're going to spend money and make false deadlines for something that the physics doesn't work on at any sort of scale... why not throw money at turning sand into gold? Then we'd all be rich! That could pay for Yang's silly UBI easily.
Though I see no reason we should just "spend more on research" and cure cancer, an stop aging first.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:48 am to Powerman
I'm just going to say it wouldn't be the worst or the dumbest $50b out government spends in any given year. I could easily make room for it.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:49 am to Powerman
Yang is fantastic as a futurist. He’s just not equipped to be President. I would love to see guys like him, Musk, Michio, etc...form a realistic, tangible, non political approach to addressing many of the issues ahead of us. The earth will die in 10 years unless we give up everything approach is just absurd and reeks to political nonsense
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:06 pm to Powerman
quote:
exploring thorium reactor tech
I thought we had these in Antarctica?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:15 pm to Powerman
I'm a huge yang fan, a lot of people just sumarrily dismiss him and his ideas - but if you dig deeper there is a lot good substance and forward thinking.
One of the biggest reasons I support him is that I think he would attempt to make changes to give more political power back to the voters and restore the public trust in our democracy.
Also, our political class are too old and dont understand technology. The questions they ask during these congressional hearings are all you need to see to realize they dont even understand fairly simple concepts such as net neutrality. They dont even have a committee to regulate and review technological advancements and how they may impact our society as they come about.
One of the biggest reasons I support him is that I think he would attempt to make changes to give more political power back to the voters and restore the public trust in our democracy.
Also, our political class are too old and dont understand technology. The questions they ask during these congressional hearings are all you need to see to realize they dont even understand fairly simple concepts such as net neutrality. They dont even have a committee to regulate and review technological advancements and how they may impact our society as they come about.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:55 pm to Powerman
Yang is the most visionary candidate for sure
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:58 pm to Powerman
Has one actually been built yet? If not this is more like all those Silicon Valley computer simulated process that didn't work making alternative energy
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:27 pm to Powerman
quote:
Andrew Yang wants Thorium Reactors by 2027
How in the f**k does he think we can turn the Norse god of thunder into an energy source? I know that we put a man on the moon, but trying to steal energy from a god is just a bridge too far.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 1:30 pm to Powerman
quote:
public intellectuals — Al Gore, Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein. They are highly-educated, do extensive research, and publish in fact-checked publications like...The New York Times.
Pure idiocy right there.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 2:42 pm to Powerman
While I still think we need a Manhattan Project II to solve fusion once and for all, fission is the intermediate step.
I reject climate alarmism and I also accept we will likely consume all the accessible fossil fuels, either for fuel or in manufacturing of plastics/synthetics. However, at some point - in the 22nd or 23rd century, we will be out of fossil fuels, except some coal.
Nuclear fission is the bridge to either fusion, some futuristic orbital high efficiency solar that can be transmitted wirelessly to the surface or geothermal/seismic/tidal energy or some combination.
We could continue with fission, relatively cleanly for a couple of centuries (or more) assuming we can solve the waste and battery issues. Of course, many legacy fission technologies are susceptible to misuse for nuclear weapons, but we're going to have to deal with that anyway - might as well get plentiful energy out of the exchange.
I reject climate alarmism and I also accept we will likely consume all the accessible fossil fuels, either for fuel or in manufacturing of plastics/synthetics. However, at some point - in the 22nd or 23rd century, we will be out of fossil fuels, except some coal.
Nuclear fission is the bridge to either fusion, some futuristic orbital high efficiency solar that can be transmitted wirelessly to the surface or geothermal/seismic/tidal energy or some combination.
We could continue with fission, relatively cleanly for a couple of centuries (or more) assuming we can solve the waste and battery issues. Of course, many legacy fission technologies are susceptible to misuse for nuclear weapons, but we're going to have to deal with that anyway - might as well get plentiful energy out of the exchange.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 3:11 pm to Powerman
So he wants something that any kook supporters he might add to his 2% would not let happen?
WTF is this waste of time?
WTF is this waste of time?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News