Author
|
Topic: The upcoming energy crisis. (Read 30666 times)
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
I think you have your terms mixed up.
Nuclear proliferation is when everyone has nuclear weapons.
A breeder reactor is where you make your neutron absorbers out of U-238 so it turns into Pu-239 and becomes fissionable. Then you fission it, and get energy. This releases neutrons, which turns more U-238 into Pu-239, and there you go.
There is no ban on breeder reactors, so far as I know. The problem is, no one has yet figured out how to build one which passes adequate safety requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
I was confused.
Breeder reactors do exist. They are distinct, so far as I know, from fast reactors. I do not know why they are not used widely, unless it is that they make plutonium, which scares people.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
rgtm202006
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 7
|
  
I've read through most of your post and I have seen that there is one mention of ZPE
believe it or not zero point energy is a theoretical energy source that high-energy physicist are studying and trying to isolate. Its likely that for the technology to be able to harness and stabalise ZPE will take several decades but its a fesable and expected energy source.
If you find that that is too far feched then you could still with nuclear fusion not fussion, with is similar to the reaction that is presently occuring in the sun.
If you need anymore information about this or just want to controdict me or for any reason whatsoever contact me just just post again I'll come check bi-weekly.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
ZPE is not an energy source.
I wrote the following article, which explains what it is and why it isn't an energy source.
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1717978
(Incidentally, there is no disclaimer here -- I am a physicist)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 23, 2006, 04:23:04 pm by Death 999 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1387
|
Ah, the link is working now, thanks.
So what you are saying is there is no known way to tranfer zero point into a lower frequency, useable form, right? It is just a carrot on a stick? (Forgive me if I'm completely off, I'm out of my league here.)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 24, 2006, 04:10:19 pm by Deus_Siddis »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
Basically, with one exception:
It's not that there there is no KNOWN way of getting this energy, but that there really is no way of getting this energy.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1387
|
Okay, so then it is not like cold fusion, where you end up getting less energy than you put in, but there is simply no way of transfering it to a useable form. This raises some questions in my mind:
1) Why is it absolutely certain that it cannot be converted, when science still doesn't have a full grasp of physics (there is still so much that is theory, and that is debated back and forth, like the accuracy of string theory?) For instance, zero point might have a different frequency in a higher dimension, or something crazy like that.
2) Is it also impossible to convert lower frequency energies into ZPE? Send them on a one-way trip, basically? Could this be what happens to matter and energy when it reaches the singularity of a black hole (if such a thing is possible?)
3) Could ZPE be some sort of property of matter (IOW, it cannot be extracted, and matter cannot exist without it as a component, perhaps?)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1387
|
That's the comparison I was trying to make, that both cold fusion and zero point energy resources are supposed to be impossible to get anything useful out of, but because of different reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lance_Vader
Frungy champion
Offline
Posts: 74
|
I, personally, don't see that there's a huge energy problem anytime in the near future. Will fossil fuels last forever? No. But they will last a long, long time. Much longer, I think, than any of us suspect. Utah alone has over 300 billion barrels of oil in the oil shale (not including the stuff we haven't even discovered)... it just isn't economically feasible to get it out yet. If the price of oil goes too high, we'll start mining that oil shale, and it will be a long time before even the U.S. runs out of that.
If the price continues to soar, then we can look forward to hydrogen fuel cells. Once cars get running on hydrogen fuel cells, the demand for oil will drop significantly (that'll be a great day), and those 300 billion barrels will last a long time. The problem there is jump-starting the hydrogen fuel cell technology through that stage where it really isn't profitable to do research yet, although we know it will be in the future.
Biodiesel isn't really viable for most instances because it pollutes as much as diesel (which discourages people from researching it) and it's really, really rough on a car. Hybrids aren't going to pull their weight (they have LOTS of moving parts, and will be expensive to maintain). Liquid Natural Gas isn't going to take off if oil dies for the same reasons that oil will die. LNG might be a good "transition fuel" for cars, but it won't be permanent.
Here's what will happen. Gasoline will get more and more expensive, and alternative fuel sources will get more and more researched until someone makes hydrogen fuel cells that are really practical. Then, everything will slowly evolve to use those. We're talking decades into the future, though, so don't mind if it's a little hazy around the edges.
As for electrical power, I have no idea what will happen. I just hope we discover a profitable cold fusion, or a good way to contain hot fusion.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
