Most active commenters
  • ok_dad(7)
  • jrflowers(4)

←back to thread

Japan has opened its first osmotic power plant

(www.theguardian.com)
301 points pseudolus | 12 comments | 25 Aug 25 02:53 UTC | HN request time: 1.54s | source | bottom
Show context
setgree ◴[26 Aug 25 18:44 UTC] No.45030567[source]▶
> While it is still an emerging technology being used only on a modest scale as yet, it does have an advantage over some other renewable energies in that it is available around the clock.

I notice the 'some' here, and the absence of the word 'nuclear' from the article, which of course is also available around the clock. Most readers will know something about Japan's troubled relationship with nuclear power and can fill in that context themselves, but to my eyes, it's a startling omission.

replies(2): >>45030651 #>>45032016 #
ok_dad ◴[26 Aug 25 20:37 UTC] No.45032016[source]▶
I love nuclear power and know a lot about operating them, however:

1) It's expensive. Very very expensive.

2) It's dangerous when not operated properly, and I don't trust commercial interests operating hundreds of these due to this reason.

3) It's bad for the environment, both the mining to get the uranium and all of the processes to turn it into fuel.

4) There is no answer for spent fuel.

Whereas with solar or wind you can basically remove #1, #2, and #4, however you still have to mine and process the materials.

Anyways, nuclear will be great for some niche uses, I am sure, but it isn't the answer to our green energy prayers.

replies(2): >>45032313 #>>45033936 #
jrflowers ◴[27 Aug 25 00:14 UTC] No.45033936[source]▶
> 4) There is no answer for spent fuel.

We store it. There are radioactive waste storage sites in 39 US states, for example.

https://curie.pnnl.gov/system/files/SNF%20and%20Rep%20Waste%...

replies(1): >>45035507 #
1. ok_dad ◴[27 Aug 25 04:35 UTC] No.45035507[source]▶
Humans haven’t stored anything for twenty thousand years yet.
replies(2): >>45036033 #>>45045716 #
2. jrflowers ◴[27 Aug 25 06:19 UTC] No.45036033[source]▶
How do you know that?

And if humanity can’t do anything that it hasn’t done before, why should we care about power generation or any problem that wasn’t completely solved before today? (Like today. The day that you are reading this.)

replies(1): >>45047456 #
3. qball ◴[27 Aug 25 21:46 UTC] No.45045716[source]▶
Humans haven't had agriculture for twenty thousand years yet.

Also, this line of inquiry is still just tilting at windmills; "somehow, future Fred Flintstone manages to get a hold of equipment capable of digging out a mile of concrete and yet somehow not know what radiation is" is not a productive line of thinking at best and a bad-faith argument at worst.

Humanity's mechanical capacity to dig that deep actually post-dates its discovery of radioactivity, too. If they have the technology for it for them digging it up to become an issue, they'll be able to identify, trivially, that it is an issue.

replies(1): >>45047438 #
4. ok_dad ◴[28 Aug 25 01:52 UTC] No.45047438[source]▶
I've never seen a tomato that could kill a man just from holding it in his hand.
replies(1): >>45048501 #
5. ok_dad ◴[28 Aug 25 01:54 UTC] No.45047456[source]▶
I know because storage of spent nuclear fuel is a pretty big deal, and right now the USA is simply sequestering it on-site with no plans beyond 50-100 years because there is NO solution for long-term (20k years) storage.
replies(2): >>45048486 #>>45049660 #
6. MisterMower ◴[28 Aug 25 04:49 UTC] No.45048486{3}[source]▶
We could reprocess it but choose not to. This is what France does. It’s not a novel process. Instead we stupidly let it sit there and pay to secure it.

Why are you so irrationally anti-nuclear?

replies(1): >>45055052 #
7. jrflowers ◴[28 Aug 25 04:51 UTC] No.45048501{3}[source]▶
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrocnide_moroides
replies(1): >>45054992 #
8. jrflowers ◴[28 Aug 25 08:05 UTC] No.45049660{3}[source]▶
Nobody asked you about what’s a big deal or not. You answered a question that nobody asked you. I asked you how do you know that humanity has never stored anything for 20,000 years. You would need a list of every thing that was ever buried by a human and then proof that everything on that list has been dug up.

“Nuclear waste makes me nervous” is not proof that we have dug up everything that has ever been buried.

Given the (possibly intentional?) inability to parse language here, to make sure that you’re not a bot, is it possible for you to answer the question? If yes say yes and then answer it, if no just write something vaguely anti-nuclear

replies(1): >>45055018 #
9. ok_dad ◴[28 Aug 25 17:53 UTC] No.45054992{4}[source]▶
I don't think humans propogate these using agriculture.
10. ok_dad ◴[28 Aug 25 17:55 UTC] No.45055018{4}[source]▶
I'm not anti-nuclear, I'm realistic and I understand the technology and it's pitfalls. I was trained to operate nuclear power plants, I understand how they work and I'm not scared of the tech. I'm scared of letting American corporations who have zero accountability construct and operate them.
11. ok_dad ◴[28 Aug 25 17:57 UTC] No.45055052{4}[source]▶
I am quite rational, thanks. See my other comment.

Also, France has a state-owned company operating the plants. I would not be averse to an American version of that, or perhaps just expand and enhance the training they already do for the naval nuclear power program and send navy nukes to operate them. I don't trust American corporations to operate them properly.

replies(1): >>45059006 #
12. MisterMower ◴[29 Aug 25 01:31 UTC] No.45059006{5}[source]▶
State owned nuclear worked out great for Chernobyl. I don't trust the state to run them, especially given the string of failures by our government to do anything competently over the past 20 years.