The new tack is to conflate nuclear energy with fossil fuels. As in assuming that nuclear energy is “legacy” power generation, and that obviously we need to use modern gernation like solar and wind, and magical grid-level storage technologies that don’t exist. Also ignore that baseload power is still required, and is currently fulfilled with Natural Gas and Coal.
Again, i’m talking energy density. All those other wacky ideas aren’t viable at all. Yes I know that the hoover dam is for generation, but the idea of pumped reserve power is literally identical to hydroelectric generation. The only difference is we would have a man-made solar/wind powered pump fill the resevoir, instead a natural source of solar power fill the resevoir. Either way, it’s a huge amount of land use for it to be considered “green.”
Additionally I never claimed nuclear power should be used as a peak generation, it should 100% used for baseload replacing all of our fossil fuel generators, with huge taxes being applied to carbon generators.
As an aside:
A higher-efficiency but not yet fully proven technology also uses gravity and elevation differences, but relies on train rails and massive cars. Here’s one company leading the charge, as it were.
This idea is trash and as far as I can tell the hypothetical existence of this is an oil industry fud campaign. The only viable version of this is pumped hydro, which has the land use problem I’ve already described.
Yikes. If words have no meaning, then sure. But there is no world where radioactive elements that come from stars have anything to do with fossil fuels that come from decayed biomass.
Another myth is that hydroelectric is “green.” It’s absolutely not. The huge amount of land required to build something like the hoover dam or the three-gorges dam is massively destructive to the existing ecology. It’s often overlooked, but land use has to be part of any environmentally sound analysis.
I would say that while the Hoover Dam, or the Three-gorges dam by themselves are acceptable, they are wholly impossible solutions for grid level storage for the entire united states/China. How practical do you think it would be to build thousands of hoover dams?
Other options like kinetic batteries etc, all come down to energy density. The highest energy density options that humans can harness are nuclear Isotopes like Uranium 238, or Plutonium 239 (what powers the voyager probes) After that is lithium batteries at ~<1% density of a nuclear battery. Everything else is fractions of a percent as efficient. Sure there are some specific use cases where a huge fly-wheel makes sense to build (data centers for example) but those cases are highly specific, and cannot be scaled out to “grid-level.” The amount of resources required per kilowatt is way too high, and you’d be better off just building some more power-plants.
Something very important that anti-nuclear but otherwise environmental minded people should realize is this sentence:
" There’s no practical way to build domestic batteries with this capacity using the technology of 2025."
Also applies to grid storage. There does not exist a chemical energy storage solution that can substitute for “baseload” power. It’s purely theoretical much like fusion power. Sure maybe in 50 years, but right now IT DOESN’T EXIST. Economically, practically, or even theoretically.
Why do I bring this up? Because I’ve seen too many people think that solar and wind can replace all traditional power plants. But if you are anti-nuclear, you are just advocating for more fossil fuels. Every megawatt of wind or solar, has a megawatt of coal or gas behind it and thus we are increasing our greenhouse gas emission everytime we build “green” generation unless we also build Nuclear power plants. /soapbox
If the offenses are note-worthy, they should be in jail. If not then no-one needs to be aware of them.
Why? Who cares about “offenses” of a random traveler. Why do you trust an international crime db to be accurate?
Sounds like this group is more of a social media vibe group, rather then a group interested in real undermining of Zionism. Maybe stop being pawns for slacktivists with rich parents and try joining the PLO instead?
So because some people can’t use no one should use it? I don’t understand the complaint. Is the hot new 1-man privacy focused app that requires side-loading more accessible?
I’m using “open source” colloquially. The point is that your specific nitpick about imessage not having some specific text file and license associated with it, isn’t important in a world where there doesn’t exist an alternative that is nearly as robust and supported. Ultimately you are upset that imessage is run by a corporation (a valid complaint) but there is no indication that the corporation is lying to you about the privacy of their messaging service.
While in the ideal world a non-opensource app would be a deal breaker, in the current world, there is no indication that imessage has any privacy concerns associated with it. It’s not just taking Apple at their word, there have been a lot practical analysis of how the protocol works. Plus the underlying cryptography is sound.
https://security.apple.com/assets/files/Security_analysis_of_the_iMessage_PQ3_protocol_Stebila.pdf <- hosted by Apple.
https://www.douglas.stebila.ca/blog/archives/2024/02/21/imessage-pq3/ <-original author
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity25/sec25cycle1-prepub-595-linker.pdf <- Independent analysis of the protocol and implementation.
Sure you could claim that actually Apple is lying about how they are securing imessage, but that is a lot of effort when they could just take the Facebook approach and straight up admit that they have the ability to read your texts, much easier, and safer legally.
Chasing the hot new app that was created by some one-person dev team for “privacy” reasons is a little like chasing amy. You are looking for an ideal app that doesn’t exist, so you can’t really suggest a better alternative. Instead you are just nagging people for using discord or imessage even though those apps are perfectly fine for 99% of people. Even privacy focused people. imessaage specifically is great for privacy and unless you have strong evidence of an apple installed backdoor for the p2p imessage encryption I’d question why your are against it.
Obviously this is all preliminary, and the US Border Control Service has zero credibility, but this actually sounds like they did some investigation and Hyundai was actually breaking the law by importing South Koreans, on non-work visa’s and then having them work at their state subsidized plant instead of hiring local workers. Apparently some executives/managers were arrested as well which doesn’t fit the normal modus operandi for ICE terror raids.
The free-market will never attempt to solve energy shortages using proven technology like Nuclear Reactors because they can make more money with fossil fuels. why would they care about an unproven tech that is “50 years” and a trillion dollars away?
Yea that link is basically what I was looking for, thanks!
Where is the RFC describing the new protocol?
There is a huge difference between embedding spyware into the silicon or cpu package of a semiconductor manufacturer or integrator and tracking a shipment of chips from a manufacturer. The first is extremely rare and basically tin-foil hat territory, the second is extremely common and any company that orders a large number of chips from a manufacturer will have GPS tracking of their shipments. Of course US Customs would use a similiar method to ensure that embargo’s and treaties mandating those embargo’s are being followed.
25 years late, but finally Iraq gets to support US hegemony as a mineral extractor.
Doesn’t horizontally scale. But sure if you want to have half your company only reachable through a firewall cluster and you don’t ever expect to exceed 100Gb, and never need to perform maintenance on that cluster, sure it’ll work.
Do some quick math. How much pumped hydro in terms of acre-feet would be required to power a hypothetical city like Chicago at night? Where would this theoretical reservoir be built?