- 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
re: Andrew Yang wants Thorium Reactors by 2027
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:18 am to SCLibertarian
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:18 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
Yang is one of the few Dems who actually has a platform instead of just impeach Trump.
What are some of these? Just generally speaking.
0
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:20 am to Powerman
quote:
He actually does have some forward thinking ideas that should at least be considered.
What existing problems do these ideas address?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:23 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:That's because their policies (tax the rich, silence people that disagree with you, etc) are all rooted in extracting revenge rather than solutions.
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 11:24 am to Dale51
quote:
hats nice Andy....does work anywhere it's tried, but at least it's really expensive.
I think the idea is to DEVELOP the technology you imbecile.
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 upgrayedd
quote:
I'm sure theres a reason why it hasn't been implemented but I haven't looked into it in a while.
Irrational fear of nuclear energy and stupid politics are among the top reasons
BTW China is currently investing in this technology. We don't want the Chinese to beat us to the punch on this IMO
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 11:30 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
That's because their policies (tax the rich, silence people that disagree with you, etc) are all rooted in extracting revenge rather than solutions.
I think that's how the common voter on the left views these issues
However I think the politicians view it as a power grab
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:35 am to Powerman
quote:
I think the idea is to DEVELOP the technology you imbecile.
Thats nice.
What are the problems with a thorium reactor now, other than it is not a self sustaining reaction, and need a constant bombardment of neutrons to keep the process going? Can this be "developed" out of?
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:35 am to Taxing Authority
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".
I think a more reasonable goal would to have these things online by the 2030s
But to me it's worth investing in the tech. And you could find the money for that by immediately eliminating all renewable initiatives at the federal level.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:37 am to Powerman
quote:
Irrational fear of nuclear energy and stupid politics are among the top reasons
BTW China is currently investing in this technology. We don't want the Chinese to beat us to the punch on this IMO
I'm sure there's more technical reasons than that.
I'm sure China is investing in a lot of different energy sources. I don't see how them "beating us to the punch" will hurt us.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:39 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I don't see how them "beating us to the punch" will hurt us.
I suppose not in any real economic way
I'd just prefer the U.S. to be at the forefront of major energy innovations. Call it pride in American exceptionalism. Did we benefit by beating the Soviets in the space race in any real meaningful way? I'd say probably but it's more about pride in some sense.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:39 am to Powerman
quote:Why aren't you writing checks and/or getting VC money?
But to me it's worth investing in the tech.
quote:Yet you like Yang's proposal to spend $50 Billion to find magic?
And you could find the money for that by immediately eliminating all renewable initiatives at the federal level.
The biggest impediment is that we don't have a shortage of electricity.
This post was edited on 11/16/19 at 11:40 am
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:42 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
The biggest impediment is that we don't have a shortage of electricity.
It's not just about whether or not there is an electricity shortage
It's about replacing existing means of generation like coal/natural gas and renewables with cheaper and more environmentally friendly options.
You might think that climate change is complete nonsense but there are a lot of powerful people that don't think it's nonsense and they're going to address it one way or the other. I'd prefer they address it in a more practical way that won't cause electricity prices to soar and in a way that doesn't waste global mineral resources on pipe dreams.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 11:44 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Why aren't you writing checks and/or getting VC money?
I pay taxes. I have a preference on how those taxes are utilized, particularly when it comes to energy issues.
I'm just some middle class guy. I'm not going to be funding energy research.
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 11:53 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:
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.
I'm not necessarily agreeing with the 50 billion dollar amount and that might be pretty high.
Now 50 billion spread out over 10 years might make more sense
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:01 pm to Powerman
quote:
I suppose not in any real economic way
I'd just prefer the U.S. to be at the forefront of major energy innovations. Call it pride in American exceptionalism. Did we benefit by beating the Soviets in the space race in any real meaningful way? I'd say probably but it's more about pride in some sense.
I'm pretty sure we've been at the forefront of that tech for a while now. I'm sure all the Chinese have done is steal the tech and try to bumble their way through it.
Posted on 11/16/19 at 12:01 pm to ItNeverRains
quote:
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
Agreed
Part of Musk's problem is he is too personally invested in solar. Although I'd say solar has much better potential than wind.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News