OT: Ramblings on Tidal Power (long)

[Chris Hogg]

I know nothing about it, but there were times when the wind was blowing strongly in Scotland producing power in excess of local demand, the Grid wasn't man enough to distribute it all southwards, and the wind farmers got paid not to generate, costing millions.

. The situation may have improved by now.

Presumably every tidal scheme would have to be connected to whatever distribution system that's appropriate with cabling sufficient to carry the maximum power produced, which seems more than a bit wasteful when for about 40% of the time it carries nothing. And I assume connecting into the grid isn't as simple as running a spur off a domestic ring main.

[Chris Hogg]

And the reactor at Oklo and its waste products doesn't seem to have done the human race or the environment in general, much harm.

[Chris Hogg]

Oh, how cruel! :-)

The sooner the Finns get their depository at Olkiluoto up and running, the sooner it'll put an end to comments such as these from Harry and his ilk, about there being no long-term solution. After that, other countries will develop similar deep depositories; there are several in the pipeline, and there is no hurry.

[Nick]

Fuel availability. 60 years is a long time. If the whole world goes nuclear how cheap will uranium be in 30 years time?

[Chris Hogg]

Uranium is comparatively cheap ATM, which doesn't provide incentives for further exploration to find new deposits. And then there's this

So it's not going to run out for a century or so, if ever, and by then fusion will have got going big time.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, not really dangerous. Potentially toxic if mishandled, but so is asbestos. Lead. Female contraceptive hormones. Aec welders. Angle Grinders. Spray paint.

That is because you are reading the media Bryan. IN fact we know exactly what range of solutions are available and how good they are and what risks they reprsent and have done for at least 40 years.

Fusion is already working Brian. I know you are visually challenged, but surely even you have walked outside and felt a certain warmth upon your face. That's a working fusion reactor, Brian.

OK God made a bit of a mess when he stuck it up there, and its radiation kills* more people than road accidents every year, but that's what happens when you are a religious nutcase, not a careful engineer.

WE should be able to do better than that. and I expect we will. At least in the case of fusion we know that if it could be made to work, it would generate a lot of very useful energy. Compared with windmills and solar panels, which theory tells us never ever could.

*look up skin cancer causes and death rates. You will be surprised. Never mind Fukushima, try factor 7.

[Fredxxx]

The article wasn't long ago and I doubt if there has been much change in infrastructure.

My point was that the National Grid did move power from one region to another, albeit within certain limits.

That is the joy of unreliable renewals in remote areas.

[Fredxxx]

But it has had 1.5 billion years to cool down and for waste to decay naturally.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, its got worse.

You are beginning to see the real issues of intermittency.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well it gave us PLowperson and Corbyn, so I am not so sure..

[The Natural Philosopher]

maybe 2-3 times higher, by which time extraction from seawater is cost competitive. Might add as much as 0.5p to the electricity costs per unit

There's between 10,000 and 30,000 years of 'everyone living at a western standard of living' energy demand for everything.

Obviously given access to massive amounts of cheap energy, who knows what uses we might find for it?

Already though the heat pollution of cities causes significant local warming, which is or isn't a good thing depending on how much skunk you are trying to grow.

Arctic circle Skyscrapers dedicated to nuclear electric fed hydroponics to make yet more crap food for overweight Urbana hipsters.

[The Natural Philosopher]

But it has in fact done neither.

>

[tim...]

fusion will still be 10 years away :-)

tim

[Chris Hogg]

That makes fascinating reading. What I find sickening is the way politicians are ignoring all the experts who understand the problems of renewables, but are pushing on with subsidising them anyway. But I guess that's politicians for you! I secretly hope that one of these winters the whole edifice comes crashing down with massive power cuts everywhere, and the whole farce will be exposed for what it is: another version of the King's new clothes. Then we might see some sense from the politicians.

I never got around to listening to David MacKay's last interview. I shall make an effort to do so, but somehow I think it'll only make my humour worse.

[Tim Streater]

ISTM that only a loony would not put power stations nearish to where the volts are going to be needed. That is, TNP is right to that extent. You are not going to put 40GW of stations together in the old rust/coal belts and then use the grid to shove that power around the country. You're going to *distribute* those stations, which is what we have to a large extent.

If you're now saying that a 3GW tidal on the west coast won't be balanced by one on the east coast, then each will need to be balanced some other way, making the whole thing a lot worse.

[Tim Streater]

Yes, and it's those decay products that were detected and are known to have come from the fission reaction. It was the unusual isotopic rations that confirm that. The point here is that the products, after

1.5 billyun years, have not moved very much.

That they are probably now fairly harmless is true but not the issue.

[Nick]

If seawater extraction is already (almost) good enough for economic running of conventional nuclear (non breader) power station why does India bother with thorium, which it does allegedly because it doesn't have uranium reserves.

I'm not suggesting you are wrong, it is just a question.

[Fredxxx]

So anything dangerous would have decayed to safe levels.

It is the issue made by Chris Hogg.

[Chris Hogg]

India has a lot of thorium

. And LFTR's are likely to happen sometime in the future, said to be safer than the current generation of uranium-based reactors. Perhaps India sees a market opportunity for both domestic and overseas sales. Or perhaps India just wants to establish itself as a market front runner in nuclear technology in general, with potential benefits.

[Chris Hogg]

The point I was making was that Oklo had dribbled nuclear waste products into the local environment and probably further afield without any obvious detrimental effect, long-term. Of course, we don't know if things would have been different if Oklo hadn't existed; life as we know it may never have happened, let alone the evolution of Homo Sapiens, but it all seems to be OK ATM. The lesson I take is that nuclear waste probably doesn't do much harm in the concentrations likely to occur in the vicinity of a waste deposit, even if the containers do eventually leak.