Poster child for the new far left is at it again.

[phil5185]

I'm an R - and I've been pushing for that Green New Deal for several years. Remember my rants about building new nuclear reactors to help the 140 that we already have in the US, they provide about 27% of our energy. (And stop pushing about $40B /yr at solar, they are providing less than 2% of our power). That solar money alone would have added several nuclear power plants.

Put more R&D into batteries, Teslas now have a 300 mile range, if we get it to 700 (a one-day drive, then recharge at motels overnite).

Power plants currently cause 45% of our carbon pollution. Cars currently cause another 45% of our pollution. Fix those two problems and our air will be cleaner than it was before cars 150 years ago.

One thing that Ocasio Cortez says that is exactly correct - we spend way too much time debating insignificant things rather than looking at the issues. Some one is going to say that Nuclear doesn't meet the true definition of 'sustainable'. True, you have to add some uranium occasionally (and define occasional). But so what - it works, it works 24 / 7, dark or light, wind or calm. As Ocasio Cortez says - don't waste a lot of time on the semantics. Kinda like Congress (& Media), Trump says 'wow, there must be 10,000 people in that crowd'. The Media takes a picture and stays up all nite counting the people - and then announces that there were only 8562 people. That's NOT how you accomplish real work, it's how you waste time and insure that nothing gets done.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jan 7, 2019 14:03:01 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

I'm an R - and I've been pushing for that Green New Deal for several years. Remember my rants about building new nuclear reactors to help the 140 that we already have in the US, they provide about 27% of our energy. (And stop pushing about $40B /yr at solar, they are providing less than 2% of our power). That solar money alone would have added several nuclear power plants.

Put more R&D into batteries, Teslas now have a 300 mile range, if we get it to 700 (a one-day drive, then recharge at motels overnite).

Power plants currently cause 45% of our carbon pollution. Cars currently cause another 45% of our pollution. Fix those two problems and our air will be cleaner than it was before cars 150 years ago.

One thing that Ocasio Cortez says that is exactly correct - we spend way too much time debating insignificant things rather than looking at the issues. Some one is going to say that Nuclear doesn't meet the true definition of 'sustainable'. True, you have to add some uranium occasionally (and define occasional). But so what - it works, it works 24 / 7, dark or light, wind or calm. As Ocasio Cortez says - don't waste a lot of time on the semantics. Kinda like Congress (& Media), Trump says 'wow, there must be 10,000 people in that crowd'. The Media takes a picture and stays up all nite counting the people - and then announces that there were only 8562 people. That's NOT how you accomplish real work, it's how you waste time and insure that nothing gets done.

We've talked about energy a few times but I'll add another dimension to this.

No one wants nuclear. No one wants nuclear in their backyard to be precise.

When we can generate it on remote power stations and ship the energy back to earth, ill reconsider.

[phil5185]

We don't agree on the primacy of nuclear phil5185 but it is a starting point. And how do you feel about safer siting for plants, and even more redundancies built into them?

I guess if you could ease my hippy dippy fears on those two points there is just one more nuclear bugaboo, and that is the waste. What to do with all of the waste?

It seems that sources such as wind, tidal and yes, solar, allay the safety and disposal concerns.

Well, we learned from Japan (2011) tsunami) that we shouldn't site them on the beach, lol - the diesel cooling pumps get flooded - but that's an easy answer, site them back up the hill a mile or so away from the beach.
As for the waste, the French solved that, they recycle all but a small amount, soon they will recycle all of it. France gets most (over 75%) of their energy from nuclear plants. And the rest comes from Hydro. The new reactors (several under construction in China) are bigger, safer, better, and use modern technology (most of the 400+ reactors in the world are 30-year-old technology.



wind, tidal and yes, solar Yes, they are safe and clean and renewable - but they don't generate much power. There is one tidal plant in the EU that works but siting requires special geography. Wind does pretty good, it now supplies 8% of US power. Solar has been massively subsidized cuz the public loves it but it only gives us about 1% to 2%, ie a failed experiment. But the public love affair forces the government to keep funding it.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 7, 2019 15:39:43 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

We don't agree on the primacy of nuclear phil5185 but it is a starting point. And how do you feel about safer siting for plants, and even more redundancies built into them?

I guess if you could ease my hippy dippy fears on those two points there is just one more nuclear bugaboo, and that is the waste. What to do with all of the waste?

It seems that sources such as wind, tidal and yes, solar, allay the safety and disposal concerns.

Well, we learned from Japan (2011) tsunami) that we shouldn't site them on the beach, lol - the diesel cooling pumps get flooded - but that's an easy answer, site them back up the hill a mile or so away from the beach.
As for the waste, the French solved that, they recycle all but a small amount, soon they will recycle all of it. France gets most (over 75%) of their energy from nuclear plants. And the rest comes from Hydro. The new reactors (several under construction in China) are bigger, safer, better, and use modern technology (most of the 400+ reactors in the world are 30-year-old technology.



wind, tidal and yes, solar Yes, they are safe and clean and renewable - but they don't generate much power. There is one tidal plant in the EU that works but siting requires special geography. Wind does pretty good, it now supplies 8% of US power. Solar has been massively subsidized cuz the public loves it but it only gives us about 1% to 2%, ie a failed experiment. But the public love affair forces the government to keep funding it.

There are at least seven tidal plants that I know of.

Once we figure out how to not only harness, but store solar energy efficiently, we're golden.

[engineerdoe]

Jan 7, 2019 15:39:43 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

Well, we learned from Japan (2011) tsunami) that we shouldn't site them on the beach, lol - the diesel cooling pumps get flooded - but that's an easy answer, site them back up the hill a mile or so away from the beach.
As for the waste, the French solved that, they recycle all but a small amount, soon they will recycle all of it. France gets most (over 75%) of their energy from nuclear plants. And the rest comes from Hydro. The new reactors (several under construction in China) are bigger, safer, better, and use modern technology (most of the 400+ reactors in the world are 30-year-old technology.

Where can I read up on what France is doing to recycle nuclear waste?

[weltschmerz]

Jan 7, 2019 17:12:00 GMT -5 engineerdoe said:

Jan 7, 2019 15:39:43 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

Well, we learned from Japan (2011) tsunami) that we shouldn't site them on the beach, lol - the diesel cooling pumps get flooded - but that's an easy answer, site them back up the hill a mile or so away from the beach.
As for the waste, the French solved that, they recycle all but a small amount, soon they will recycle all of it. France gets most (over 75%) of their energy from nuclear plants. And the rest comes from Hydro. The new reactors (several under construction in China) are bigger, safer, better, and use modern technology (most of the 400+ reactors in the world are 30-year-old technology.

Where can I read up on what France is doing to recycle nuclear waste?

For now, spent fuel from French nuclear reactors is stored in pools next to the reactors before it is shipped to state-owned nuclear fuel group Orano’s recycling plant in La Hague, western France.



But La Hague is not designed for long-term storage and France does not have a solution 40 years after investing heavily in nuclear energy. Other countries that use nuclear power face the same problem.

uk.reuters.com/article/uk-france-nuclearpower-waste/quiet-no-more-french-village-becomes-centre-of-anti-nuclear-protest-idUKKBN1HP1S7

Well, that sounds encouraging, doesn't it?
Phil said the problem was solved.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Solved for people not expecting to live 40 more years?

And/or far away from France?

[weltschmerz]

Jan 7, 2019 17:23:16 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Solved for people not expecting to live 40 more years?

And/or far away from France?

Solved for people who live in Trump's dream world, apparently.

[thyme4change]

Jan 4, 2019 22:34:18 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 4, 2019 20:05:05 GMT -5 countrygirl2 said:

I don't disagree with her.  I think she is a bright young woman, hope she doesn't lose all that enthusiasm.

Wondering how fast your tune will change when you get hit with, say a 40% tax bill.
We all know you can afford to pay it!

You do understand it is a marginal tax rate and wouldn't be 40% of your income. Maybe it could be if you make many, many millions of dollars per year, but not people who earn less than multi-millions.

[phil5185]

Where can I read up on what France is doing to recycle nuclear waste?

Here's commentary on what the French are doing, it may lead to some technical details. They are recycling significant amounts of 'waste' fuel, and working on ways to improve and build on the La Hague methods. The French still have the 'waste' storage problems, they don't have recycling capacity to go back to their 1970s stock piles - but new technology and larger facilities could help there.

www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/recycling-nuclear-fuel-the-french-do-it-why-cant-oui

[weltschmerz]

That article is 12 years old, Phil, and the French STILL don't have a solution.
Furthermore, the Heritage Foundation? Seriously?
The ultra-right wing think tank behind Trump's terrible policies, like repealing environmental regulations? Right.

newrepublic.com/article/140271/dc-think-tank-behind-donald-trump

[phil5185]

and the French STILL don't have a solution.

I would call what they are doing with recycling at La Hague as a 'solution' - perhaps not commoditized yet, but a 'solution'.
But yes, the waste storage is not yet under control. Ie, 100% of the waste cannot be recycled at this point, so storage, temporary or otherwise, is still required. But have a little faith in the French, they have been using nuclear power for 75% of their country for decades, they will do the R&D build solutions.

[happyhoix]

Jan 7, 2019 15:39:43 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

We don't agree on the primacy of nuclear phil5185 but it is a starting point. And how do you feel about safer siting for plants, and even more redundancies built into them?

I guess if you could ease my hippy dippy fears on those two points there is just one more nuclear bugaboo, and that is the waste. What to do with all of the waste?

It seems that sources such as wind, tidal and yes, solar, allay the safety and disposal concerns.

Well, we learned from Japan (2011) tsunami) that we shouldn't site them on the beach, lol - the diesel cooling pumps get flooded - but that's an easy answer, site them back up the hill a mile or so away from the beach.
As for the waste, the French solved that, they recycle all but a small amount, soon they will recycle all of it. France gets most (over 75%) of their energy from nuclear plants. And the rest comes from Hydro. The new reactors (several under construction in China) are bigger, safer, better, and use modern technology (most of the 400+ reactors in the world are 30-year-old technology.



wind, tidal and yes, solar Yes, they are safe and clean and renewable - but they don't generate much power. There is one tidal plant in the EU that works but siting requires special geography. Wind does pretty good, it now supplies 8% of US power. Solar has been massively subsidized cuz the public loves it but it only gives us about 1% to 2%, ie a failed experiment. But the public love affair forces the government to keep funding it.

On the beach isn't the only hazardous location - earthquake zones, tornado alleys, and then potential terrorist attacks (or theft of the used material for dirty bombs) - there's a lot that can go wrong in nasty ways with nuclear energy.

Hard to hurt yourself with a wind mill, unless it falls on top of you.

You've put all your faith in the French coming up with a way to 100% recycle the spent fuel, I'd rather put my faith in finding ways to make solar/wind and tidal energy more efficient, and cheaper. If you put solar roof tiles on your house, or use solar cell windows in your sky scraper, and it provides enough energy to power your house or power your office tower, does it really matter if they are less efficient than nuclear power? If 10% efficiency gives you all the power you need, you're good, right?

My next house, I'm using a geothermal heat pump to heat and cool the house, and a solar array for the lights, hot water, etc. My goal is to be off the grid for my retirement. 

[weltschmerz]

Jan 8, 2019 17:52:19 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

and the French STILL don't have a solution.

I would call what they are doing with recycling at La Hague as a 'solution' - perhaps not commoditized yet, but a 'solution'.
But yes, the waste storage is not yet under control. Ie, 100% of the waste cannot be recycled at this point, so storage, temporary or otherwise, is still required. But have a little faith in the French, they have been using nuclear power for 75% of their country for decades, they will do the R& build solutions.

...and again, from a CURRENT article which is not 12 years old.


For now, spent fuel from French nuclear reactors is stored in pools next to the reactors before it is shipped to state-owned nuclear fuel group Orano’s recycling plant in La Hague, western France.



But La Hague is not designed for long-term storage and France does not have a solution 40 years after investing heavily in nuclear energy. Other countries that use nuclear power face the same problem.

uk.reuters.com/article/uk-france-nuclearpower-waste/quiet-no-more-french-village-becomes-centre-of-anti-nuclear-protest-idUKKBN1HP1S7

[countrygirl2]

My next house, I'm using a geothermal heat pump to heat and cool the house, and a solar array for the lights, hot water, etc. My goal is to be off the grid for my retirement.



We have geothermal it uses electricity. And the backup if it goes off for some reason is a heat strip.  We use 2400 kwhs, the electric and heat is running us $300 a month. Water heater about 55 gallon, it has heat assist from the geothermal.  Rate is about $.11 per kwh.  $40 of that bill is sales tax and our outside light, so really $260, it has never been this high, when we moved in ran about $175 a month.

Not sure what we would need for a solar array, but don't think it would payback in our lifetime. 

[Value Buy]

Jan 6, 2019 23:47:23 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jan 4, 2019 18:45:37 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

Seriously!  I don't understand why the rich needed the tax cut in the first place.  Meanwhile, after removing the personal exemption and doubling the standard deduction, I am actually paying thousands more in taxes than I did last year.  And I am as middle of the road middle class as you can get. 

It about time the rich get screwed!

every dollar i save in taxes this year (and it should be significant), i am putting into a foreign bank account (HSBC).  shouldn't take long before i can buy a place in Europe.

I thought you had your heart set on something in Central America

[Value Buy]

Jan 4, 2019 19:54:26 GMT -5 dondub said:

Don't. VB's post is trash. She's a woman that will not be needing a babysitter.

Please show me any male Freshman Congress person who has made as many outrageous statements, or even a single outlandish statement, rivaling her's and I will say HE needs a babysitter.

[hurley1980]

Jan 10, 2019 15:41:59 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 4, 2019 19:54:26 GMT -5 dondub said:

Don't. VB's post is trash. She's a woman that will not be needing a babysitter.

Please show me any male Freshman Congress person who has made as many outrageous statements, or even a single outlandish statement, rivaling her's and I will say HE needs a babysitter.

How about our Freshman President? He's the most outrageous/outlandish one of all! 

[weltschmerz]

Jan 10, 2019 15:39:01 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 6, 2019 23:47:23 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

every dollar i save in taxes this year (and it should be significant), i am putting into a foreign bank account (HSBC).  shouldn't take long before i can buy a place in Europe.

I thought you had your heart set on something in Central America

I he goes to Central America, he won't be able to come back and visit family because....WALL!

[Value Buy]

Jan 10, 2019 15:59:12 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 10, 2019 15:39:01 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I thought you had your heart set on something in Central America

I he goes to Central America, he won't be able to come back and visit family because....WALL!

dj, is golden. His family tree in America goes back well over a century.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 10, 2019 16:04:22 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 10, 2019 15:59:12 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

I he goes to Central America, he won't be able to come back and visit family because....WALL!

dj, is golden. His family tree in America goes back well over a century.

What difference does it make?

  If that crazy asshole gets elected again, and still doesn't have his behemoth wall, he just might shut the whole border down. Nothing in, nothing out.
He's enough of a dumbass to do just that.

[Value Buy]

Jan 10, 2019 16:11:45 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 10, 2019 16:04:22 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

dj, is golden. His family tree in America goes back well over a century.

What difference does it make?

  If that crazy asshole gets elected again, and still doesn't have his behemoth wall, he just might shut the whole border down. Nothing in, nothing out.
He's enough of a dumbass to do just that.

Believe it or not, I am going to try to be less confrontational here in 2019, so I am going to pass on this comment. Hopefully I will make it for a couple of months! 
(my wife is betting it is more like ten days)

[weltschmerz]

Suit yourself.

[weltschmerz]

It's not like he hasn't threatened to "shut the border entirely".
He's done it more than once.

[phil5185]

he just might shut the whole border down. Nothing in, nothing out.
He's enough of a dumbass to do just that.

BTW, that has precedence - the Immigration Act of 1921 and of 1924.

Aside from that, our country needs to look at the math. We hear about the security, drugs, rapists, racism, yada. But simple math tells you that there is a limit to the RATE of allowable immigration. Eg, if we controlled the rate to 5 million new immigrants per year, in 50 years we will have 250 million new folks, added to our current 300 million citizens. That is a lot of new schools, requires millions of new jobs, lots of new Social Security checks, hospitals, news highways, millions of new cars on the roads, a major restructuring of our food growing industry, and so on. We could probably find ways to handle it - but is it something that is desirable? Elbow to elbow people, all scrambling for food, shelter?

If the 1921 Administration figured out the math, why are we having to re-learn it?

[mroped]

All we get in a year as immigrants is 50000 through Lottery Visa and whatever asylum claims are being processed which is about the same number.
If there would be a fair, legal way and expedite the process then many would come in legally.
As it were, it sucks big time!

[dondub]

Are there not 7,000,000 jobs currently available in the above ground economy? That disposable income and tax revenue might come in mighty helpful during this time of yet another

round of Repo-Con Tinkle Down Debt Explosion.

Wouldn't you agree Phil?

[djAdvocate]

Jan 10, 2019 15:39:01 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 6, 2019 23:47:23 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

every dollar i save in taxes this year (and it should be significant), i am putting into a foreign bank account (HSBC).  shouldn't take long before i can buy a place in Europe.

I thought you had your heart set on something in Central America

nope.  I need to check my spreadsheet, but I think CA is in 5th place, now.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 10, 2019 16:04:22 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 10, 2019 15:59:12 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

I he goes to Central America, he won't be able to come back and visit family because....WALL!

dj, is golden. His family tree in America goes back well over a century.

10 generations. 

[countrygirl2]

Big business doesn't what legal immigration.  If everyone was legal, people would not be willing to work for nothing for fear of being turned in. Again they can solve this with fining and jailing business owners that hire illegals.  But we also need an orderly system to process and let enter or return the ones not allowed.  We keep putting these things off instead of fixing it.  I'm a firm believer in also not making someone a citizen just because they are born on our soil.


This all needs fixed and defused, will help everything.  But we don't need a damn wall, just a bunch of money wasted use that money to fix our immigration system.