Conservatism and the Environment

[Duke Nukem]

Post something on them if you can.

Ok ill post one soon

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

Update: it seems Bill Gates has decided to branch out into the Energy industry. And he'd doing it with something that I predicted a year ago would be one of the logical steps forward.

Posted 31 August 2020 Forbes goes into Gates's newest project. The Molten salt reactor. This was an interesting read.

Bill Gates’ Nuclear Startup Unveils Mini-Reactor Design Including Molten Salt Energy Storage

Nuclear firms TerraPower and NuScale hope to develop the latest generation of small nuclear reactors. The first units could arrive by the mid- to late-2020s.

www.forbes.com

On one hand, more investment in nuclear research is always good. My worry however is, will this even be allowed to go through? A lot of people responsible for approving stuff tend to hate nucler energy for ideological reasons. Or they are missinformed by said ideologues.

 

[Bacle]

Update: it seems Bill Gates has decided to branch out into the Energy industry. And he'd doing it with something that I predicted a year ago would be one of the logical steps forward.

Posted 31 August 2020 Forbes goes into Gates's newest project. The Molten salt reactor. This was an interesting read.

Bill Gates’ Nuclear Startup Unveils Mini-Reactor Design Including Molten Salt Energy Storage

Nuclear firms TerraPower and NuScale hope to develop the latest generation of small nuclear reactors. The first units could arrive by the mid- to late-2020s.

www.forbes.com

Nice, NuScale's SMRs are really a game changer for the nuclear power industry.

Only problem is the current cores only last like a couple years before you have to swap them out, unless they've got new models in use.

Has anyone heard of algae biofuels? those seem pretty promising.

Post something on them if you can.

Algea biofuels are legit, but throughput is still where they are running into issues, IIRC.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Lab grown meat seems it could be a decent at reducing the massive use of resources that the Farming industry is right now.

 

[Bacle]

Lab grown meat seems it could be a decent at reducing the massive strain on resources that the Farming industry is right now.

Lab grown meat is useful for off-planet meat production, for sure.

Trying to use it to replace ranching and such on Earth will only see the tech buried under anger of ranching families and thier communities.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Lab grown meat is useful for off-planet meat production, for sure.

Trying to use it to replace ranching and such on Earth will only see the tech buried under anger of ranching families and thier communities.

I don't mean replacing just reducing the of so many resources.

 

[Bacle]

I don't mean replacing just reducing the of so many resources.

Most resources lost to ranching are done because people cut corners, or straight up don't give a fuck about long-term sustainability.

Ranching isn't the problem, cheapskates and unbridled greed are.

 

[Duke Nukem]

FOund this short video on Alage biofuels



If no one wants to watch the vid I'll try to explain, I suck at that type of stuff though.

 

[Marduk]

FOund this short video on Alage biofuels



If no one wants to watch the vid I'll try to explain, I suck at that type of stuff though.

Seems like typical green tech pitch...
Ok, but what are the numbers?
Namely, how much electricity does it cost to make a liter of diesel this way, and how much does the process cost?
Because it seems to be just one of these techs that don't produce energy, merely change its form from electricity to combustible liquid.
Which has its uses, but to make it economically viable on mass scale it would require a source of electricity, and ridiculously cheap electricity at that to have a even a chance of competing with fossil fuels.

 

[Bacle]

Seems like typical green tech pitch...
Ok, but what are the numbers?
Namely, how much electricity does it cost to make a liter of diesel this way, and how much does the process cost?
Because it seems to be just one of these techs that don't produce energy, merely change its form from electricity to combustible liquid.
Which has its uses, but to make it economically viable on mass scale it would require a source of electricity, and ridiculously cheap electricity at that to have a even a chance of competing with fossil fuels.

Merge it with small, dedicated reactors to save on transmission loss.

Energy in liquid form can be cheaper to move over long distance than energy via transmission lines, due to loss of power over distance.

It also is more useful for isolated areas that may not have good 'conventional' refining capacity.

 

[Typhonis]

Don't cattle and such eat plants humans can't eat thus food that would go to waste is actually utilized?

 

[Marduk]

Merge it with small, dedicated reactors to save on transmission loss.

Energy in liquid form can be cheaper to move over long distance than energy via transmission lines, due to loss of power over distance.

It also is more useful for isolated areas that may not have good 'conventional' refining capacity.

You're talking science fiction here.
Because if transmission losses for delivering power to remote destinations were a greater concern than the cost of general electric energy production, nuclear, fossil or otherwise, it would mean we're in a sci fi universe.

We don't have large amounts of cheap energy to spare for liquid fuel production, first the whole ordinary grid would love to gorge itself on such cheap energy if we had such and if these mini reactors can make it so cheap.

Take this:
Average commercial electricity rate in USA is something about 8 cents per kilowatt hour. Which is 3.6 megajoules. That means a liter of diesel would require at very physical minimum about 10 of them. Considering losses in the production process it would need to be more - let's say 12 to 20, settle on optimistic 15 for simplicity. That would make a gallon of it equivalent to 54 kilowatt-hours, or in price terms, minimum of 4.32 USD per gallon production cost. Add taxes, logistics, infrastructure...
Right now the market price for diesel in USA is about 2.4 USD per gallon after all sorts of taxes and logistical costs.
See the problem?

If these reactors can make electricity cheap enough to make this remotely feasible for fuel production, then its making electricity so cheap that grid operators would kill to have it instead.

 

[Bacle]

You're talking science fiction here.
Because if transmission losses for delivering power to remote destinations were a greater concern than the cost of general electric energy production, nuclear, fossil or otherwise, it would mean we're in a sci fi universe.

We don't have large amounts of cheap energy to spare for liquid fuel production, first the whole ordinary grid would love to gorge itself on such cheap energy if we had such and if these mini reactors can make it so cheap.

Take this:
Average commercial electricity rate in USA is something about 8 cents per kilowatt hour. Which is 3.6 megajoules. That means a liter of diesel would require at very physical minimum about 10 of them. Considering losses in the production process it would need to be more - let's say 12 to 20, settle on optimistic 15 for simplicity. That would make a gallon of it equivalent to 54 kilowatt-hours, or in price terms, minimum of 4.32 USD per gallon production cost. Add taxes, logistics, infrastructure...
Right now the market price for diesel in USA is about 2.4 USD per gallon after all sorts of taxes and logistical costs.
See the problem?

If these reactors can make electricity cheap enough to make this remotely feasible for fuel production, then its making electricity so cheap that grid operators would kill to have it instead.

You keep forgetting places off the grid do exist; Alaska and remote parts of the West, have places this can work.

You keep thinking of looking at it from a 'whole grid' approach, not looking at unique areas it can be made to work.

 

[Marduk]

You keep forgetting places off the grid do exist; Alaska and remote parts of the West, have places this can work.

You keep thinking of looking at it from a 'whole grid' approach, not looking at unique areas it can be made to work.

These places use so little energy in the grand scheme of things that sticking them on fossil fuels makes no difference in terms of economy or CO2 emissions. Also LNG is a nice option for them.

 

[Bacle]

These places use so little energy in the grand scheme of things that sticking them on fossil fuels makes no difference in terms of economy or CO2 emissions. Also LNG is a nice option for them.

Pipelines and permafrost have issues coexisting.

It's why the Trans-Alaskan pipeline is on radiator stilts. There is a new LNG pipeline set to take off from Fairbanks down to Nikiski on the Kenai, after going through Palmer/Wasilla/Anchorage, to make heating cheaper, but that won't help places outside of the Mat-Su Valley and parts of the Kenai.

So Nome, Sitka, Kodiak, and others will still be off-grid and off pipeline. Alaska, IIRC, only has a single marine deisel refinery in Valdez, and has to re-import gasoline/lighter petro's back into the state.

Smaller bio-mass/reactor hybrid refineries in outlying town can seriously help thier economies, particularly if you can make bio-mass derived av-gas too.

Alaska is already hurting a lot due to Covid killing the tourist season, and oil's price dropping for a while, so this could help breath new life into an area most forget exists.

Also, those places do care about CO2, because the poles warm faster than the equator. They can use passive carbon capture tech in conjunction with bio-mass/reactor set up to handle energy and reduce carbon emissions.

 

[Marduk]

Pipelines and permafrost have issues coexisting.

It's why the Trans-Alaskan pipeline is on radiator stilts. There is a new LNG pipeline set to take off from Fairbanks down to Nikiski on the Kenai, after going through Palmer/Wasilla/Anchorage, to make heating cheaper, but that won't help places outside of the Mat-Su Valley and parts of the Kenai.

So Nome, Sitka, Kodiak, and others will still be off-grid and off pipeline. Alaska, IIRC, only has a single marine deisel refinery in Valdez, and has to re-import gasoline/lighter petro's back into the state.

Smaller bio-mass/reactor hybrid refineries in outlying town can seriously help thier economies, particularly if you can make bio-mass derived av-gas too.

How is making everyone around them pay California+ prices for fuel going to help their economy? No, its going to murder their economy.

Transporting LNG or diesel around, by truck if necessary, is going to be much cheaper.

Also, those places do care about CO2, because the poles warm faster than the equator. They can use passive carbon capture tech in conjunction with bio-mass/reactor set up to handle energy and reduce carbon emissions.

Due to the needs of such rural places being as small as they are in the grand scheme of things, their caring about CO2 is irrelevant, and them switching to overly expensive energy sources is well below margin of error when it comes to global CO2 emissions, while significant problem for their local economy.

 

[Bacle]

How is making everyone around them pay California+ prices for fuel going to help their economy? No, its going to murder their economy.

Transporting LNG or diesel around, by truck if necessary, is going to be much cheaper.

There are barely any roads in AK, and most travel is done by boat, aircraft, or frozen trails during the winter.

Normal Lower 48 wisdom doesn't always work there; they have rather unique economic/logistical issues that don't really exist elsewhere in the US.

Due to the needs of such rural places being as small as they are in the grand scheme of things, their caring about CO2 is irrelevant, and them switching to overly expensive energy sources is well below margin of error when it comes to global CO2 emissions, while significant problem for their local economy.

It would bring new jobs and income to places that are already rather in the edge economically.

And passive carbon capture is more effective around the poles, because it removes it from where it can do the most harm.

 

[Marduk]

There are barely any roads in AK, and most travel is done by boat, aircraft, or frozen trails during the winter.

Normal Lower 48 wisdom doesn't always work there; they have rather unique economic/logistical issues that don't really exist elsewhere in the US.
It would bring new jobs and income to places that are already rather in the edge economically.

Again, would the end product be cheaper than just the cost of moving conventional fuel by conventional means from the nearest logistical hub?
If we're talking logistics, this algae stuff certainly need their own, and making it locally would add another issues that would add to the production cost, especially in places which you imply pay a massive transport markup on normal fuel, making the algae calculation even worse.

And passive carbon capture is more effective around the poles, because it removes it from where it can do the most harm.

This doesn't change the basic energy cost calculation in any significant way.

 

[Spartan303]

Here is another article on this.

NuScale’s small nuclear reactor is first to get US safety approval

Small size can help with economics and safety.

arstechnica.com

 

[Duke Nukem]

It would be nice to see Nuclear Fusion get significant results sometime this century.