Why the fascination with intermittent renewable energy sources?

[sophiecentaur]

Eh - I do not think you know what "The Road Song of the Bandar-Log" is about.

Recently, I have read a significant number of late 19th and early 20 th century authors, including Kipling. I could not avoid coming to the conclusion that British and US authors of the time were incredibly and shamelessly racist and white supremist. Kipling's jungle book is a perfect example and it is easy to see the Bandar-Log as representing 'The Lower Races'.
I'm not sure of the reason for your Kipling quotation. (It could be straight, ironic or double ironic) but I am sure that Kipling was being Kipling as usual.
My recent readings have been mainly re-readings and, in my teens, I found them very exciting and glorious. 50++ years on and I see them in a very different light. Sorry if I appear oversensitive.

 

[Klystron]

I also agree that we should utilize all practical electrical power generation methods. All methods had rocky beginnings and failures but that is how systems improve. Poorly informed public opinion should never sound the death knell of otherwise usable technology. Private investors must be correctly informed; a reason for threads like this.

How is attacking a viable but developing technology such as wind, for instance along Tehachapi ridge, more righteous than denying permits for future advanced nuclear power stations because of mistakes at Three Mile Island? The Kipling quotes apply both ways.

Solar power generation in the Mojave Desert and similar areas makes engineering and economic sense. The issue of intermittent sunlight is being mitigated by molten salt and other experimental technology along with the fact that local electricity demand peaks in the Summer when solar generation is most efficient.

I agree with investing in new nuclear technology while also supporting development of other electrical power generating technology. There is no reason to exclude viable technology. Solar works well in the high deserts, wind generation along windy mountain ridges, geo-thermal near volcanic vents and presumably tidal generation in the proper tide zones. The real challenge is preserving the various ecosystems; reducing bird kills from wind vanes and solar concentrators, for example.

 

[sophiecentaur]

hydroelectric power has killed vastly more people than nuclear fission.

That's a similar sort of statistic that says more people have died on the golf course than skydiving so golf must be more dangerous. Or that most people die in bed etc. etc.

There is a significant difference in the long term effect of Nuclear technology and any other low carbon system (hostage to fortune ). That is worrying in itself but if we could rely on a properly rational assessment of risks and benefits then it might prove, on balance, that nuclear is the way forward. But we have never looked at genuine total cost of nuclear installations, including decommissioning and the last place to look for a genuine assessment is with the big companies that want the business and the short terms that naive and often corrupt governments work to.

The whole thing is very perplexing.

 

[essenmein]

I take it you're referring to 'Thorium' cycle ??
IIRC, that lacks U235/U238 etc separation and proliferation issues, and the neutron flux could be used to cook existing waste to shorter lived isotopes...

FWIW, if Fukushima had 'ridden out' its tsunami, if that site had been logically arranged such the sea-wall's over-topping would not drown those vital back-up systems, general opinion might be different...

IIRC, Fukushima managers and engineers frequented a near-by fishing port's most excellent restaurant. Beside that, there was a well-kept memorial for a historical tsunami's many victims. Its tide-mark stood significantly higher than the reactor site's sea-wall...
Go figure...

Problem with the thorium cycle is that to fully utilize the potential essentially requires a breeder reactor. Or if you are not breeding, since Th232 is not fissile, you need to add Pu239 or U235 to reach criticality (ie non proliferation is moot as you must have the nuke bomb fuels to start your Th232 reactor).

In a breeder, while the thorium fuel cycle generally prevents proliferation (unless you can get out the U232), once you know how to build a breeder, its not a leap to breed U238 into Pu239, or, as you say "cooking" existing waste (generally U235 and U238, ie depleted Uranium) with the spare neutrons, breeds your plutonium for you, much the same way the neutron flux from DT fusion (primary energy output from DT fusion is fast neutrons) gives you the same access to all the Pu239 you might want.

IMO proliferation is a nice idea, but one that has a distinct time limit before the cat really is out of the bag, as we advance in understanding of nuclear science and engineering at some point we will be able to make any element we want, including all the bad ones. At some point it will be like trying to stop anyone with basic knowledge in chemistry from making gunpowder.

I was reading about a table top neutron source to make radio isotopes directly in hospitals, all we have to do is advance that neutron source tech a bit more, and anyone can make Pu239 by blasting regular old natural U238 with neutrons. Or we don't need criticality in reactors, neutron source + breedable fuel (eg spent fuel rods) = many power (i believe this is the heart of the Russian fission fusion hybrid idea).

I guess the point is once we as a species know enough about nuclear science, you're not going to be able to prevent proliferation...

 

[Svein]

Recently, I have read a significant number of late 19th and early 20 th century authors, including Kipling. I could not avoid coming to the conclusion that British and US authors of the time were incredibly and shamelessly racist and white supremist. Kipling's jungle book is a perfect example and it is easy to see the Bandar-Log as representing 'The Lower Races'.
I'm not sure of the reason for your Kipling quotation. (It could be straight, ironic or double ironic) but I am sure that Kipling was being Kipling as usual.
My recent readings have been mainly re-readings and, in my teens, I found them very exciting and glorious. 50++ years on and I see them in a very different light. Sorry if I appear oversensitive.

Bandar-log is from "The Jungle Book", therefore any literary criticism should be based on that.

On another note, I meant it to be read as an allegory - pointed at (especially) politicians. They promise all sorts of wonderful things "Won by merely wishing it so".

 

[sophiecentaur]

therefore any literary criticism should be based on that.

Well yes - mine was based on it. You and I have identified two different targets for his allegory, I think. But that's allegory for you. . . . . and being Kipling as usual.