Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 11:36:40 JST Bread up, Bro
   well, the future is here, just gotta make it though
   • Embed this notice
     PopulistRight (populistright@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 12:04:02 JST PopulistRight

     in reply to
     @sickburnbro The ones that can burn spent nuclear fuel are the most interesting - also include melt-down proof designs:
     iaea.org/bulletin/when-nuclear-waste-is-an-asset-not-a-burden
     Bread up, Bro likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     brokeassredneck (brokeassredneck@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 21:27:46 JST brokeassredneck

     in reply to

     • PopulistRight
     @PopulistRight @sickburnbro or , just cut back on consuming ? not a hippie by any means , but quit falling for ((their )) bullshit
   • Embed this notice
     PopulistRight (populistright@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 21:27:46 JST PopulistRight

     in reply to

     • brokeassredneck
     @brokeassredneck @sickburnbro Abundant energy = higher standard of living.
     Other things matter too, of course, like keeping out 3rd World hordes.
     Bread up, Bro likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 21:33:03 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to

     • PopulistRight
     • brokeassredneck
     @PopulistRight @brokeassredneck yeah, this is the part that people don't want to talk about, because it lays bare the whole "green" movement. To a large degree, standard of living and energy consumption are tied.
     
     What is worse that I try to explain to people is that you can't even easily cut back on certain things to "help the planet" as an example: thinking "making all passenger cars into battery cars will help" - well, the problem is that the petrochemcial production chain produces a lot of stuff we use everywhere and per gallon of crude, there are only so many things you can economically produce. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry) ) If you want everything industrial to still run on diesel ( and you do ) - it's not a simple thing to say "ok what are we going to do with all this gasoline?" You can't just change it all into diesel or Jet A.
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:30:28 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to

     • trjjb
     @trjjb like many things, there is the truth and then there is what people believe.
     
     While you can argue with it, you can also look at it as people not trusting something and then going with the absolute worse case scenario.
   • Embed this notice
     trjjb (trjjb@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:30:29 JST trjjb

     in reply to
     @sickburnbro Is this really such a huge selling point? Chernobyl disaster, which is the gold standard of anti-nuclear talking points only happened because of the rushed building of ChNPP, RBMK reactors being horribly designed i.e. positive steam reactivity, control rods with graphite tips, no Iodine pit detection systems (which is why only USSR built them), and because Dyatlov had abysmal work ethic. A lot of things had to go awry in a very precise manner, otherwise the disaster wouldn't have happened.
     Sure, a meltdown-proof reactor is nice, but that's kinda overkill. You could get the same results by not building RBMK's and not hiring retards.
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:31:06 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to

     • trjjb
     @trjjb but the future that I'm talking about isn't pebble bed reactors, it's nuclear power.
   • Embed this notice
     trjjb (trjjb@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:44:38 JST trjjb

     in reply to

     • Marvelous
     @Marvelous7578 @sickburnbro I have been shitting on soviet RBMK's for a while now, but ultimately it's retards like Dyatlov that cause nuclear disasters, the reactor type only facilitates it. I'm sure there's a way to cause a meltdown of any type of reactor, it just comes down to finding the right type of moron to do it.
     Bread up, Bro likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Marvelous (marvelous7578@sosial.agdersam.no)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:44:39 JST Marvelous

     in reply to
     Don't think I'll believe anything about a commie reactor.
   • Embed this notice
     trjjb (trjjb@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:45:22 JST trjjb

     in reply to
     @sickburnbro That's just me thinking out loud. The whole anti-nuclear thing is financed by big oil/big coal, so trying to have a good faith conversation with them is like arguing with a TV. Sure, you can redpill Greenpeace libtards by facts and logic, but ultimately it's a waste of time.
   • Embed this notice
     Bread up, Bro (sickburnbro@poa.st)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 22:45:22 JST Bread up, Bro

     in reply to

     • trjjb
     @trjjb there are always groups that have interests that they push, but you can only sell what people want to buy