• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Not As Environmentally Friendly As Promised

Sharon Hill said:
I don't understand this comment. Climate change is still a very REAL issue that results in greater power usage.
There is not a simple single "solution" for this.
Click to expand...
What @Analogue Boy said in post #1969.
Nuclear provides steady, uninterrupted baseload electricity, suitable for use by heavy industry and for all the devices we are charging (including cars).
Solar and wind are intermittent and variable, so need some form of local storage to make them reliable. This can take the form of huge banks of batteries, or it can be used to (say) electrolyse water for its hydrogen, which can then be burned as fuel. Both of these forms of storage are inefficient and lossy. In the case of battery storage, this necessitates the use of more of the world's mineral resources. Another storage method might be to use solar and wind energy to pump water to a lake with a hydroelectric dam (not a readily-available option in most countries).
As the world population grows, the increased demand for power will mean that the most scalable option is nuclear power. It uses less land and less of the world's resources. It is also the most 'green' option. Sure, all that steel and concrete is a big hit to the environment upfront, but once it is built, you could run that power station for 100 years (using the best currently-available designs). If you built a Thorium reactor, you could probably run it for much longer. Only the Chinese have had the guts to give Thorium a trial; our own so-called 'leaders' don't have the will to do anything at all.
To address the issue that nuclear power stations are a target... they can be built in such a way that they will resist attack and they can be guarded. All of this needs to be considered when designing new power stations. If such an attack was made by a foreign power... well, we have bigger problems as that would mean an all-out war. If only this country would stop meddling in world affairs, we'd be a lot safer.
 
Mythopoeika said:
What @Analogue Boy said in post #1969.
Nuclear provides steady, uninterrupted baseload electricity, suitable for use by heavy industry and for all the devices we are charging (including cars).
Solar and wind are intermittent and variable, so need some form of local storage to make them reliable. This can take the form of huge banks of batteries, or it can be used to (say) electrolyse water for its hydrogen, which can then be burned as fuel. Both of these forms of storage are inefficient and lossy. In the case of battery storage, this necessitates the use of more of the world's mineral resources. Another storage method might be to use solar and wind energy to pump water to a lake with a hydroelectric dam (not a readily-available option in most countries).
As the world population grows, the increased demand for power will mean that the most scalable option is nuclear power. It uses less land and less of the world's resources. It is also the most 'green' option. Sure, all that steel and concrete is a big hit to the environment upfront, but once it is built, you could run that power station for 100 years (using the best currently-available designs). If you built a Thorium reactor, you could probably run it for much longer. Only the Chinese have had the guts to give Thorium a trial; our own so-called 'leaders' don't have the will to do anything at all.
To address the issue that nuclear power stations are a target... they can be built in such a way that they will resist attack and they can be guarded. All of this needs to be considered when designing new power stations. If such an attack was made by a foreign power... well, we have bigger problems as that would mean an all-out war. If only this country would stop meddling in world affairs, we'd be a lot safer.
Click to expand...
A lot of the initial protests about nuclear power were to do with the safe disposal of nuclear waste which, if I understand correctly has a long half life meaning that it remains dangerous for a long time. Has this problem been solved? If not dumping radioactive waste all over the planet surely isn't a great idea.
 
All the air conditioning units combined use one heck of a lot of power.

Not just in houses and vehicles, but the vast shopping centres/malls airports etc.
These are the places that should we should first and foremost be looking at to reduce power usage.

Houses that are properly designed for the climate (in countries that are permanently hot) mean that air con usage could be greatly reduced, if not abolished in some cases.
(Same with houses in cold climates like Scandinavia that are designed far better than a lot of the UK's).
 
Tunn11 said:
A lot of the initial protests about nuclear power were to do with the safe disposal of nuclear waste which, if I understand correctly has a long half life meaning that it remains dangerous for a long time. Has this problem been solved? If not dumping radioactive waste all over the planet surely isn't a great idea.
Click to expand...
Some of the nuclear waste can be re-processed back into usable fuel. Thorium is considered to be a waste by-product, for example - but it can be used as fuel. FYI, Britain has the world's largest reserves of usable Thorium sitting in water-cooled vats.
Other waste, such as radioactive water, can be massively diluted with seawater, then released safely back into the environment. Anything else can be encapsulated in glass and buried. It's really not the massive problem that alarmists think it is.
 
kesavaross said:
No. If I made links for everything I came across I'd need another computer just to keep track of it all. And even then, I don't have a clue how to catalogue it all. I checked it out at the time and was satisfied it was genuine. I also read about it in a Nexus magazine that gave numerous sources for the article including his daughter who had begged her father to just drop it before he ended up dead. So he stopped any further pursuing of his invention.

Sometimes, maybe do your own research as well. I do. So can you. The question is will you?

I keep coming across this problem. I say frequently to do your own research but people in general won't. Why? It's not complex unless the person relies on Google or worse still, the BBC, which is heavily censored and controlled. No real research based on Google searches is worth reading unless it's tittle tattle. Even Wikipedia lies about some subjects.

A good few months ago I said to a neighbour about the Nord Stream pipe line and to check out a ladies comments about it before it happened. Her name is Victoria Newland. She is a US political person and I don't know what office she holds, or did hold, but it is or was an important one. ( I have no interest in US politics or any politics). US politics confuse me anyway. I saw that neighbour a few week ago and I asked him had he checked it out. Guess what the answer was?

I have now given up on such things. From this point onwards on this forum, I am not going to bother. There is no point. People in general will believe only what the tv or the MSM tells them. It's of course better to go with what you know and have been taught than search outside that 'box'.

A last parting question, do research on the CIA program started in the early 50's called MK Ultra. MK standing for Mind (K)Control and it's long term purpose to control what the people think via the controlled advertising, tv and the MSM. I bet very, very few will do that to any extent. I also bet that quite a few on here know all about it but are keeping quiet.

For me, that is my last post on such things. It's not in keeping with this forum. I prefer things 'time slip' and 'UFO' which fascinate me. Also ghosts, another enigma along with general forteana.
Click to expand...
As I’ve said before, it’s you who’s making a statement therefore it’s up to you to support it with some sort of evidence. I’m hardly going to go looking in advance for something I don’t believe am I? However, if I’m pointed to a supporting link I’ll read it. Who knows - I could learn something & it could change my mind.

However, I’ve had a brief search for water-powered cars & have found nothing which leads me to believe it’s possible.

There was one Stanley Meyer who before his mysterious death claimed to have invented a process but didn’t manage to convince anyone as far as I can see. His last words were ‘they poisoned me” & many people believe he was murdered to prevent his ‘invention’ going any further. Is he the man you read about?

You can read the story here:
https://tcct.com/news/2020/11/the-mysterious-death-of-stanley-meyer-and-his-water-powered-car/

Here’s a quick video about the problem with water power which also mentions Stanley Meyer. To quote Scottie from Star Trek - you cannae change the laws of physics.


So where would go to get your non tittle-tattle information from?
 
Farmers using solar power like Monty Burns would.

Solar-Powered Farming Is Quickly Depleting the World's Groundwater Supply​

Farmers in arid regions are turning to low-cost solar pumps to irrigate their fields. This eliminates using fossil fuels and boosts crop production, but is drying up aquifers around the globe.

THIS STORY ORIGINALLY appeared on Yale Environment 360 and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

There is a solar-powered revolution going on in the fields of India. By 2026, more than 3 million farmers will be raising irrigation water from beneath their fields using solar-powered pumps. With effectively free water available in almost unlimited quantities to grow their crops, their lives could be transformed. Until the water runs out.

The desert state of Rajasthan is the Indian pioneer and has more solar pumps than any other. Over the past decade, the government has given subsidized solar pumps to almost 100,000 farmers. Those pumps now water more than a million acres and have enabled agricultural water use to increase by more than a quarter. But as a result, water tables are falling rapidly. There is little rain to replace the water being pumped to the surface. In places, the underground rocks are now dry down to 400 feet below ground.

That is the effective extraction limit of the pumps, many of which now lie abandoned. To keep up, in what amounts to a race to the bottom of the diminishing reserves, richer farmers have been buying more powerful solar pumps, leaving the others high and dry or forcing them to buy water from their rich neighbors.

Water wipeout looms. And not just in Rajasthan.

Solar pumps are spreading rapidly among rural communities in many water-starved regions across India, Africa, and elsewhere. These devices can tap underground water all day long at no charge, without government scrutiny.

For now, they can be great news for farmers, with the potential to transform agriculture and improve food security. The pumps can supply water throughout the daylight hours, extending their croplands into deserts, ending their reliance on unpredictable rains, and sometimes replacing existing costly-to-operate diesel or grid-powered pumps.

But this solar-powered hydrological revolution is emptying already-stressed underground water reserves—also known as groundwaters or aquifers. The very success of solar pumps is “threatening the viability of many aquifers already at risk of running dry,” Soumya Balasubramanya, an economist at the World Bank with extensive experience of water policy, warned in January. ...

https://www.wired.com/story/solar-energy-farming-depleting-worlds-groundwater-india/
 
Well, here is Meyer's 'fuel cell'
sm.png
.
 
Tunn11 said:
A lot of the initial protests about nuclear power were to do with the safe disposal of nuclear waste which, if I understand correctly has a long half life meaning that it remains dangerous for a long time. Has this problem been solved? If not dumping radioactive waste all over the planet surely isn't a great idea.
Click to expand...
The response was, 'Why don't we bury it in the Australian outback - after all, most yellowcake comes from Australia...'
 
hunck said:
As I’ve said before, it’s you who’s making a statement therefore it’s up to you to support it with some sort of evidence. I’m hardly going to go looking in advance for something I don’t believe am I?
Click to expand...
Yet here we are discussing UFOs, Ghosts, Bigfoot etc with tiny slivers of cloudy information and having to ration our belief on nothing more than someone’s account.
In terms of the water powered car, this was covered in a magazine read by those with a Fortean bent back in the day. We had computers but the internet as we know it now didn’t exist then as an instantaneous recall. I think we used our own memory and filed things in our heads rather than rely on a google search for links. A lot of the stuff we discuss here is preInternet and we don’t have Enola anymore to sift through the records unfortunately.

I said it was covered in Nexus magazine. I’m guessing back issues are available if you’re willing to subscribe and do the research.
 
hunck said:
As I’ve said before, it’s you who’s making a statement therefore it’s up to you to support it with some sort of evidence. I’m hardly going to go looking in advance for something I don’t believe am I? However, if I’m pointed to a supporting link I’ll read it. Who knows - I could learn something & it could change my mind.

However, I’ve had a brief search for water-powered cars & have found nothing which leads me to believe it’s possible.

There was one Stanley Meyer who before his mysterious death claimed to have invented a process but didn’t manage to convince anyone as far as I can see. His last words were ‘they poisoned me” & many people believe he was murdered to prevent his ‘invention’ going any further. Is he the man you read about?

You can read the story here:
https://tcct.com/news/2020/11/the-mysterious-death-of-stanley-meyer-and-his-water-powered-car/

Here’s a quick video about the problem with water power which also mentions Stanley Meyer. To quote Scottie from Star Trek - you cannae change the laws of physics.



So where would go to get your non tittle-tattle information from?
Click to expand...
The person was Stanley Meyer. The following is from my memory of the article in Nexus that went into much detail. There is no doubt in my mind at least that his invention was viable and it worked. He drove across the US in his hydrogen powered car. All his invites to the MSN to come and have a look or to interview him fell on deaf ears. All potential investors he spoke to all said the same to him, that investing in his invention was a death wish and that the big oil and fuel producers would never allow it to see the light of day. He was also offered large sums of money to sell the patents which he refused to do and as you correctly say, his last words were 'they've poisoned me'. The identity of the two potential investors he was speaking to at the time remains unknown. The autopsy gave the reason for death as a stroke but according to his daughter, who was present at the time, I think, the symptoms she said he showed were not those of a person having a fatal stroke. I may be wrong on that.

As for showing links, etc. When I can, I do. I get a lot of info from the alternative social media channels like Rumble, Bitshute, etc. Also the dark web which is not full of dodgy stuff that a person may come across by accident. The dodgy stuff is usually accessed by invitation only not that I've ever searched for it or have inclination to either. A lot of journalists, university students, etc, etc, use it for research because it is beyond the domain of the highly censored Google, etc. All that is needed is a Tor browser and a VPN from any country except a 5 eyes country, a 5+ eyes country, and a 9 or 14 eyes one. The reason being privacy. I know of someone who did a lot of research on red mercury who ended up in prison albeit for a very short time for something that apparently doesn't exist. He was found guilty of a completely different contrived charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes#Other_international_cooperatives

When asking for links to stuff I post I get a little puzzled. The whole world of the Fortean, the paranormal and the unexplained and so on is virtually all unprovable. It relies often on what a person says happened or what they obsevered which is not proof per say. Video evidence can be faked and often is. Even quoting books by such esteemed authors as Jenny Randall or Dr Paul Lee is still not actual proof. (No insult intended. I have read and thoroughly enjoyed books by both and others.) I sometimes come across something within, say, a video or an article, and decide to look more into it and off I go. Sometimes it leads to somewhere and sometimes it leads to nowhere. A link is not proof. That's why I say to do your own research and make up your own mind.

I've been labeled many time as a conspiracy theorist and I have always said to do your own research yet those who I say that to don't do that. What is so complex or conspirital about that comment? I am not saying what I say is true, so do your own research and decide for your self. They then seem to always go with the flow of what the media tells them. I just don't get it and I now give up. Maybe the allure of Netflix is too strong or they can't be bothered. Again, I recommend doing research into the CIA's Operation MK Ultra started in the 1950's. Many answers lie there as to the mass brain washing of society. As the saying goes, it is easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. I doubt on any on this forum will to any extent look into MK Ultra and those that know already will keep quiet. That is the nature of the beast.

This morning I was watching a boring video that initially caught my eye about ancient portals to other worlds and dimensions. The video was crap but it got me thinking. There's lots of ancient legends and other myths about portals in mountainous areas and other strange places so this afternoon I looked for further videos or articles. I didn't really get any further but had I, I wouldn't have book marked the video or article for the reason I originally explained. I would end up with literally thousands of bookmarks which I would then forget what each one was for. Also, sometimes something relevant is mentioned within a video related to other stuff. How do I bookmark that?

I don't know if I've answered your question sufficiently but I hope I have at least explained my take on it.

Edit: If using the dark web, never open anything that doesn't seem right and never download anything. Also, never give out your email address. Most definitely, never try and buy anything. I once down loaded a game I was looking for having not found it via Google. That was that my pc wrecked. The utmost golden rule, never ever use a credit card. Simple browsing is fine and quite safe. Obviously good antivirus and malware software is recommended and I've never had a problem on this, a MacBook Pro, which is now 12 years old. I did however get an email from Southern Water recently saying my on line details with them have been hacked in to. So which is safer?
 
Last edited:
I only bought a few copies of Nexus but they covered that story as you’ve told it. I stopped buying it partly for financial reasons (keeping the FT on of course) but also because of the exceedingly wild conspiracy stuff they’d present seemingly without filter. Great post on the perils of follwing links there. Sometimes gems are hidden inside other articles and are not as easy to track down.
 
kesavaross said:
The person was Stanley Meyer. The following is from my memory of the article in Nexus that went into much detail. There is no doubt in my mind at least that his invention was viable and it worked. He drove across the US in his hydrogen powered car. All his invites to the MSN to come and have a look or to interview him fell on deaf ears. All potential investors he spoke to all said the same to him, that investing in his invention was a death wish and that the big oil and fuel producers would never allow it to see the light of day. He was also offered large sums of money to sell the patents which he refused to do and as you correctly say, his last words were 'they've poisoned me'. The identity of the two potential investors he was speaking to at the time remains unknown. The autopsy gave the reason for death as a stroke but according to his daughter, who was present at the time, I think, the symptoms she said he showed were not those of a person having a fatal stroke. I may be wrong on that.

As for showing links, etc. When I can, I do. I get a lot of info from the alternative social media channels like Rumble, Bitshute, etc. Also the dark web which is not full of dodgy stuff that a person may come across by accident. The dodgy stuff is usually accessed by invitation only not that I've ever searched for it or have inclination to either. A lot of journalists, university students, etc, etc, use it for research because it is beyond the domain of the highly censored Google, etc. All that is needed is a Tor browser and a VPN from any country except a 5 eyes country, a 5+ eyes country, and a 9 or 14 eyes one. The reason being privacy. I know of someone who did a lot of research on red mercury who ended up in prison albeit for a very short time for something that apparently doesn't exist. He was found guilty of a completely different contrived charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes#Other_international_cooperatives

When asking for links to stuff I post I get a little puzzled. The whole world of the Fortean, the paranormal and the unexplained and so on is virtually all unprovable. It relies often on what a person says happened or what they obsevered which is not proof per say. Video evidence can be faked and often is. Even quoting books by such esteemed authors as Jenny Randall or Dr Paul Lee is still not actual proof. (No insult intended. I have read and thoroughly enjoyed books by both and others.) I sometimes come across something within, say, a video or an article, and decide to look more into it and off I go. Sometimes it leads to somewhere and sometimes it leads to nowhere. A link is not proof. That's why I say to do your own research and make up your own mind.

I've been labeled many time as a conspiracy theorist and I have always said to do your own research yet those who I say that to don't do that. What is so complex or conspirital about that comment? I am not saying what I say is true, so do your own research and decide for your self. They then seem to always go with the flow of what the media tells them. I just don't get it and I now give up. Maybe the allure of Netflix is too strong or they can't be bothered. Again, I recommend doing research into the CIA's Operation MK Ultra started in the 1950's. Many answers lie there as to the mass brain washing of society. As the saying goes, it is easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. I doubt on any on this forum will to any extent look into MK Ultra and those that know already will keep quiet. That is the nature of the beast.

This morning I was watching a boring video that initially caught my eye about ancient portals to other worlds and dimensions. The video was crap but it got me thinking. There's lots of ancient legends and other myths about portals in mountainous areas and other strange places so this afternoon I looked for further videos or articles. I didn't really get any further but had I, I wouldn't have book marked the video or article for the reason I originally explained. I would end up with literally thousands of bookmarks which I would then forget what each one was for. Also, sometimes something relevant is mentioned within a video related to other stuff. How do I bookmark that?

I don't know if I've answered your question sufficiently but I hope I have at least explained my take on it.

Edit: If using the dark web, never open anything that doesn't seem right and never download anything. Also, never give out your email address. Most definitely, never try and buy anything. I once down loaded a game I was looking for having not found it via Google. That was that my pc wrecked. The utmost golden rule, never ever use a credit card. Simple browsing is fine and quite safe. Obviously good antivirus and malware software is recommended and I've never had a problem on this, a MacBook Pro, which is now 12 years old. I did however get an email from Southern Water recently saying my on line details with them have been hacked in to. So which is safer?
Click to expand...
Thanks for the detailed reply.

OK - so we’re talking about the same man. We’ve both read/watched stuff & come to different conclusions. Fair enough - we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

I don’t see what’s the issue asking for a link. A ‘happened to me’ story obviously can’t be backed up with a link but a story of a man who invented things & made the news can. It’s not Fortean or paranormal - there’s ‘factual’ information which can be found.

It took me about 30 seconds to find the Stanley Meyer story. From the numerous comments to some videos, plenty believe he was murdered because of his invention.

I haven’t ventured on to the Dark Web so I have no idea what it’s like. All I’d say is you have to look at who’s providing the content. We’ve had numerous posts here linking to one-man blogs which if you didn’t look at who’s behind them, you might take as some sort of authority rather than a man with opinions & an agenda.
 
hunck said:
Thanks for the detailed reply.

OK - so we’re talking about the same man. We’ve both read/watched stuff & come to different conclusions. Fair enough - we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

I don’t see what’s the issue asking for a link. A ‘happened to me’ story obviously can’t be backed up with a link but a story of a man who invented things & made the news can. It’s not Fortean or paranormal - there’s ‘factual’ information which can be found.

It took me about 30 seconds to find the Stanley Meyer story. From the numerous comments to some videos, plenty believe he was murdered because of his invention.

I haven’t ventured on to the Dark Web so I have no idea what it’s like. All I’d say is you have to look at who’s providing the content. We’ve had numerous posts here linking to one-man blogs which if you didn’t look at who’s behind them, you might take as some sort of authority rather than a man with opinions & an agenda.
Click to expand...
I didn't realise you meant a link about the engine that ran on water. I thought you meant me providing links in general.

I tend to be very skeptical if I come across an article for video that is a bit to way out there as it were or has nothing to corroborate it. Even then, sometimes these 'out there' articles and videos can turn out to be quite possibly true. A few years back I listened to a talk about the 'deep state' using directed energy weapons that are in orbit that use high powered microwaves to start wild fires in the US, South American, etc and it was also used to bring down the twin towers. I thought it unlikely. Then last year someone sent me a link which showed trees in a wild fire burning from the inside out. In January this year I was sent a video by email which showed a wild fire in Hawaii which was a type of fire that I have never seen before. It was weird. Both were exactly as described in the original talk I watched.

My point is that sometimes one link or piece of information that seems improbable is then coroborated by other pieces of information that build up a picture but which cannot then be packaged into a link or have any easily identifiable source than none the less is probably the truth of the matter.

With the dark web especially I always try to check out the person and what other articles or talks have they given, etc and then I look for anything else similar in the same way. I don't blindly accept anything nor do I blindly reject it. Most of the time I have an 'if you say so' neutral type of opinion.
 
Analogue Boy said:
I only bought a few copies of Nexus but they covered that story as you’ve told it. I stopped buying it partly for financial reasons (keeping the FT on of course) but also because of the exceedingly wild conspiracy stuff they’d present seemingly without filter. Great post on the perils of follwing links there. Sometimes gems are hidden inside other articles and are not as easy to track down.
Click to expand...
Nexus does often print off the wall conspiracy stuff but it is within their remit of what they will publish. Over all I find it a worth while read.
 
kesavaross said:
A few years back I listened to a talk about the 'deep state' using directed energy weapons that are in orbit that use high powered microwaves to start wild fires in the US, South American, etc and it was also used to bring down the twin towers. I thought it unlikely. Then last year someone sent me a link which showed trees in a wild fire burning from the inside out. In January this year I was sent a video by email which showed a wild fire in Hawaii which was a type of fire that I have never seen before. It was weird. Both were exactly as described in the original talk I watched.

My point is that sometimes one link or piece of information that seems improbable is then coroborated by other pieces of information that build up a picture but which cannot then be packaged into a link or have any easily identifiable source than none the less is probably the truth of the matter.

With the dark web especially I always try to check out the person and what other articles or talks have they given, etc and then I look for anything else similar in the same way. I don't blindly accept anything nor do I blindly reject it. Most of the time I have an 'if you say so' neutral type of opinion.
Click to expand...
When I hear stories like this I ask who is the Deep State, is it an American Deep State & if so, why are they starting catastrophic wildfires in their own country? To what end?

As to the twin towers, there’s me thinking it was aircraft crashing into them as filmed on scores of videos.
 
hunck said:
When I hear stories like this I ask who is the Deep State, is it an American Deep State & if so, why are they starting catastrophic wildfires in their own country? To what end?

As to the twin towers, there’s me thinking it was aircraft crashing into them as filmed on scores of videos.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure who the deep state are either. Some say it's the hidden world wide cabal who are in lock step to enslave the human race though for what purposes? Again, who knows?

There'a an interest documentary type video called September Clues about 9/11.

https://fakeotube.com/v/31

Mods, please move if necessary. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
On Stanley Meyer, popped up in my youtube feed.

/link should hopefully go to 19:50 in the video

 
Mythopoeika said:
What @Analogue Boy said in post #1969.
Nuclear provides steady, uninterrupted baseload electricity, suitable for use by heavy industry and for all the devices we are charging (including cars).
Solar and wind are intermittent and variable, so need some form of local storage to make them reliable. This can take the form of huge banks of batteries, or it can be used to (say) electrolyse water for its hydrogen, which can then be burned as fuel. Both of these forms of storage are inefficient and lossy. In the case of battery storage, this necessitates the use of more of the world's mineral resources. Another storage method might be to use solar and wind energy to pump water to a lake with a hydroelectric dam (not a readily-available option in most countries).
As the world population grows, the increased demand for power will mean that the most scalable option is nuclear power. It uses less land and less of the world's resources. It is also the most 'green' option. Sure, all that steel and concrete is a big hit to the environment upfront, but once it is built, you could run that power station for 100 years (using the best currently-available designs). If you built a Thorium reactor, you could probably run it for much longer. Only the Chinese have had the guts to give Thorium a trial; our own so-called 'leaders' don't have the will to do anything at all.
To address the issue that nuclear power stations are a target... they can be built in such a way that they will resist attack and they can be guarded. All of this needs to be considered when designing new power stations. If such an attack was made by a foreign power... well, we have bigger problems as that would mean an all-out war. If only this country would stop meddling in world affairs, we'd be a lot safer.
Click to expand...
It would be GREAT if next gen nuclear power was feasible in the US and UK in the next few years. But it doesn't appear that way. And we're rather in a hurry.

kesavaross said:
Serious question. Why does climate change result in more power usage?

I would think the solution is to build more power stations.
Click to expand...
The world is warming. A lot. Increased summer demands for cooling are expected to outweigh any energy-use reductions from lower heating needs in the winter. There will be a greater need to pump and treat water as parts of the world run out of fresh water for drinking and agriculture.

Building more power stations is overly simplistic. 1. What kind of power stations? Burning fossil fuels is obviously going to take us to hell even faster. 2. Climate change cause power disruptions (larger storms, flooding, hurricanes, etc). https://www.epa.gov/climateimpacts/climate-change-impacts-energy 3. It takes money and time to do that. One viable option would be for people to have their own solar or wind power generation but that's obviously not feasible for most people.
 
ramonmercado said:
Farmers using solar power like Monty Burns would.

Solar-Powered Farming Is Quickly Depleting the World's Groundwater Supply​

Farmers in arid regions are turning to low-cost solar pumps to irrigate their fields. This eliminates using fossil fuels and boosts crop production, but is drying up aquifers around the globe.

THIS STORY ORIGINALLY appeared on Yale Environment 360 and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

There is a solar-powered revolution going on in the fields of India. By 2026, more than 3 million farmers will be raising irrigation water from beneath their fields using solar-powered pumps. With effectively free water available in almost unlimited quantities to grow their crops, their lives could be transformed. Until the water runs out.

The desert state of Rajasthan is the Indian pioneer and has more solar pumps than any other. Over the past decade, the government has given subsidized solar pumps to almost 100,000 farmers. Those pumps now water more than a million acres and have enabled agricultural water use to increase by more than a quarter. But as a result, water tables are falling rapidly. There is little rain to replace the water being pumped to the surface. In places, the underground rocks are now dry down to 400 feet below ground.

That is the effective extraction limit of the pumps, many of which now lie abandoned. To keep up, in what amounts to a race to the bottom of the diminishing reserves, richer farmers have been buying more powerful solar pumps, leaving the others high and dry or forcing them to buy water from their rich neighbors.

Water wipeout looms. And not just in Rajasthan.

Solar pumps are spreading rapidly among rural communities in many water-starved regions across India, Africa, and elsewhere. These devices can tap underground water all day long at no charge, without government scrutiny.

For now, they can be great news for farmers, with the potential to transform agriculture and improve food security. The pumps can supply water throughout the daylight hours, extending their croplands into deserts, ending their reliance on unpredictable rains, and sometimes replacing existing costly-to-operate diesel or grid-powered pumps.

But this solar-powered hydrological revolution is emptying already-stressed underground water reserves—also known as groundwaters or aquifers. The very success of solar pumps is “threatening the viability of many aquifers already at risk of running dry,” Soumya Balasubramanya, an economist at the World Bank with extensive experience of water policy, warned in January. ...

https://www.wired.com/story/solar-energy-farming-depleting-worlds-groundwater-india/
Click to expand...
Squeezing all the possible water out of the ground, they are. It's unfortunate that the headline suggests the damage is done by solar power. The problem is overuse of water resources.
 
Some years ago I went to Mt. Gambier with a friend who had come from there.
The famous blue lake was way down and not blue at all,
She said that the numerous vineyards that had sprung up were using the ground water.
 
Mythopoeika said:
Another storage method might be to use solar and wind energy to pump water to a lake with a hydroelectric dam (not a readily-available option in most countries).
Click to expand...
Works very well - there are two schemes in Snowdonia originally used to balance loads from nuclear power stations but work equally well for storing solar or wind. They pump water from a lower lake to an upper lake off peak and then release the water back down on high demand.

The failure to commit to an on-going nuclear program in the UK from the 1970's on has caused the demise of our own home grown nuclear solutions and the result is we now have projects contracted out overseas which are not only ridiculously expensive but employ less safe technology than we were building in the 1960's .
 
Last edited:
France has had a big problem due to corrosion (and therefore a huge cost) with a lot of their reactors which produced around 60% of electricity.
 
Cochise said:
The failure to commit to an on-going nuclear program in the UK from the 1970's on has caused the demise of our own home grown nuclear solutions and the result is we now have projects contracted out overseas which are not only ridiculously expensive but employ less safe technology than we were building in the 1960's .
Click to expand...
Yes. It has led to a real depletion in the number of trained and qualified people who might work in the industry.
I've met a few nuclear physicists over the years - all working in software, because they couldn't find work.
One guy worked for BNFL for years before he had to find other work in the technology sector.
It's past the time that real action should have been taken. UK has gone from being a world leader to a world loser.
 

Renault sent me an £11,000 bill to repair my Zoe heater​

‘My husband contacted Renault UK customer service again to see if it could help but it couldn’t even tell us which dealers had the equipment to remove a battery. Eventually, we found one but we have now been quoted £9,121 to fix it. With the £2,000 we have already paid, this makes a grand total of £11,000 to repair a heater, making the car a write-off at five years old.’


https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/apr/17/renault-repair-zoe-heater-car
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top