Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Reduce your carbon footprint - let the train take the strain


 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nick C said:

From a technical perspective, that's one of the easiest of the problems to solve - There's a type of reactor called a molten salt reactor, which can use as it's fuel, the low-grade Uranium that's left over as waste from conventional reactors - I'm not sure of the exact details, but it's somehow made into a salt (hence the name), which is kept in a molten state by the power in the reactor, and kept in place by a frozen plug.

 

They have the wonderful property that, in the event of a catastrophic power failure (like at Fukushima), the plug melts, and the contents are dumped into a shallow pool, where it solidifies and becomes safe* - so there's no risk of it going critical. The problem, however, is that they can't be used for enrichment, so most governments aren't particularly interested in building them...

 

* or at least, doesn't contaminate the surrounding area!

I know that depleted uranium and plutonium which are recovered using chemical precipitation processes and reused but there are other 'fission fragments' left over which are highly radioactive and cannot be reused in a reactor or for PIT production. These appear to be the problem. 

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Baby Deltic said:

I know that depleted uranium and plutonium which are recovered using chemical precipitation processes and reused but there are other 'fission fragments' left over which are highly radioactive and cannot be reused in a reactor or for PIT production. These appear to be the problem. 

 

And many tons of irradiated steel, concrete etc. We have (as do the USA & Russia) quite a few decommissioned nuclear submarines which are awaiting very expensive dismantling - maybe they'll never get dismantled and be entombed like the Chernobyl plant.

 

I'm for the molten salt reactor utilising the low grade nuclear fuel NickC mentioned. Let the Iranians make the enriched stuff !!!!!

 

Brit15

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

And many tons of irradiated steel, concrete etc. We have (as do the USA & Russia) quite a few decommissioned nuclear submarines which are awaiting very expensive dismantling - maybe they'll never get dismantled and be entombed like the Chernobyl plant.

 

I'm for the molten salt reactor utilising the low grade nuclear fuel NickC mentioned. Let the Iranians make the enriched stuff !!!!!

 

Brit15

The molten salt reactor still has a waste tank from what I understand of them. I think they came about as a result of experiments with Thorium salts. Any time you split Uranium or Plutonium atoms you are going to get a pair of smaller nuclei as which are highly radioactive and useless because of it. That's the price you pay for unleashing that energy. Some uranium atoms can absorb neutrons instead of fissioning (238, not 235) and change into Neptunium then Plutonium which can be used in (I think) fast breeder reactors, or for Plutonium Implosion Trigger production in thermonuclear weapons. Some of the 238 can also be used in these weapons aswell.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • RMweb Premium

Today has seen the notion of using rail instead of flying surface in a couple of news outlets.

 

To be fair the Guardian of late has been promoting this idea fairly strongly in its Saturday travel supplement but today the BBC has got in on the act too. Maybe it's coincidence or maybe we really are beginning to see a shift in opinions.

Edited by Neil
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/07/2019 at 14:16, Torper said:

 

 That is such an uncaring comment.  Thousands of jobs down the drain?  Painful?  Besides which, they're not burning coal simply to preserve mining jobs.  They're burning it to fuel the industry on which so many other jobs also depend.

 

DT

 

Firstly to their cost the Australians are facing absolute devastation to some parts of their country due to climate warning which burning coal greatly contributes to. They are massive exporters of coal, whose industry has lobbying against taking measures to prevent global warming. The population have now woken up to the devastation it is causing. My view is carbon fuels should only be used when their emissions can be safely dealt with. The irony is that Australia is probably far better placed to benefit from renewable energy than most other countries, yet it still exports millions of tons of coal a year

 

On the other hand I get fed up being lectured by the so called middle class about cutting down on my carbon footprint. Most I think are outright hypocrites when they continue to fly, have large new cars which they swap in every 3 years and commute many hundreds if not thousand of miles a year and no doubt eat plenty of out of season products and buy clothing which they dispose of regularly. I would imaging that my own carbon footprint is probably far lower than many of these campaigners, and that's without trying, as I like many others can say not guilty to many of these excesses

 

As for the thousands of jobs down the drain if the Germans stop coal mining, these opencast megga mines have few employees. By using cleaner/renewable fuels, they will create their own jobs, possibly more !!. My own view is jobs like these should be made redundant and replaced my greener alternatives.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also getting fed up of the "middle class" (who ever they are these days) shoving their agenda down everybody's throats. (New Dr Who series last night included !!)

 

I'm not a denier (more of a questioner), but I'm also getting tired of the "do as I say but not as I do" attitudes, mainly by so called "celebrities" etc.

 

Reduce my carbon footprint ? - Hell YES, energy is too damn expensive to waste. 

 

Brit15

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

I'm also getting fed up of the "middle class" (who ever they are these days) shoving their agenda down everybody's throats. (New Dr Who series last night included !!)

 

I'm not a denier (more of a questioner), but I'm also getting tired of the "do as I say but not as I do" attitudes, mainly by so called "celebrities" etc.

 

Reduce my carbon footprint ? - Hell YES, energy is too damn expensive to waste. 

 

Brit15

 

I totally accept that us humans must stop polluting our planet and I think most right thinking folk would agree. But I get fed up with

 

A/ those who preach to me whilst still flying, commuting large distances, buying gas guzzling cars, changing them every 3 years, driving their children to school, eating out of season food and consuming large quantities of clothing. Those who choose to live a simple self sustaining lifestyle I admire, and will listen to. I also hate being preached by Vegans !! do go ahead and live your own lifestyle, but nature allowed humans to evolve as omnivores 

 

B/  The likes of China, India etc who continue to increase polluting unheaded. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Quite agree John I feel it's more productive to extol the benefits and joy of train travel rather than getting all waggy finger at those who still fly/drive gas guzzlers etc. It becomes a bit difficult when we hit the grey areas like the desire to leave the planet in better condition than we found it, as there a positive arguments for doing this and negative arguments if we choose to ignore. However none of this diminishes the sheer excitement that there is to be had from setting out on a long distance train journey. Now where's my passport ....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Neil said:

Quite agree John I feel it's more productive to extol the benefits and joy of train travel rather than getting all waggy finger at those who still fly/drive gas guzzlers etc. It becomes a bit difficult when we hit the grey areas like the desire to leave the planet in better condition than we found it, as there a positive arguments for doing this and negative arguments if we choose to ignore. However none of this diminishes the sheer excitement that there is to be had from setting out on a long distance train journey. Now where's my passport ....

 

We are planning our holiday this year, which will be our fourth European holiday starting at St Pancras. OK its dearer than flying, but you get 2 extra days holiday (4 actually as you can write off the first and last day of a flying holiday with all the airport hassle), Forget saving the planet its a lovely way of travelling, with the european part far superior than the UK, and on the whole the passengers seem nicer, or is it just less stressed ?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last week I had to go to Edinburgh for a morning meeting.  Used the Caledonian Sleeper for the first time to get there without any hassle and then came back on sundry cross country trains in the afternoon.  A very enjoyable and productive trip, far less hassle than flying would have been (I hate flying, anyway) and by the time costs of taxis to and from the airports and an overnight hotel stay were included, no more expensive.  As for the thought of driving all the way there and back (8+ hours each way) I'm far to old to do that these days!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 13/01/2020 at 12:39, hayfield said:

 

B/  The likes of China, India etc who continue to increase polluting unheaded. 

 

Yes, but we should also acknowledge that China is at the forefront of much new technology that enables low-carbon economies. Pretty much all the storage batteries are coming out of China be that for vehicles or storing surplus renewable energy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 minutes ago, eastglosmog said:

Last week I had to go to Edinburgh for a morning meeting.  Used the Caledonian Sleeper for the first time to get there without any hassle and then came back on sundry cross country trains in the afternoon.  A very enjoyable and productive trip, far less hassle than flying would have been (I hate flying, anyway) and by the time costs of taxis to and from the airports and an overnight hotel stay were included, no more expensive.  As for the thought of driving all the way there and back (8+ hours each way) I'm far to old to do that these days!

 

This is certainly a topical comment in light of FlyBe's problems and HM Government response.

 

From some parts of the country, the train is not really a viable option. What do we do for them?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Yes, but we should also acknowledge that China is at the forefront of much new technology that enables low-carbon economies. Pretty much all the storage batteries are coming out of China be that for vehicles or storing surplus renewable energy.

 

Agreed its doing a lot of work on new technology, but at the same time its bringing online new fossil fuel power stations and keeping unchecked its older ones. Agreed the first world has a responsibility to clean up its act, but its pointless when places like China and India carry on polluting regardless. Everyone has a duty to curb emissions. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

This is certainly a topical comment in light of FlyBe's problems and HM Government response.

 

From some parts of the country, the train is not really a viable option. What do we do for them?

 

It must be far more productive and far less expensive to have a video conference call !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

 

It must be far more productive and far less expensive to have a video conference call !!

Not in my line of business it isn't.  You cannot examine rocks or buildings adequately without being there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, hayfield said:

 

 Agreed the first world has a responsibility to clean up its act, but its pointless when places like China and India carry on polluting regardless. Everyone has a duty to curb emissions. 

There's an interesting list of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita on Wkipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita

 

There are an enormous number of countries with minimal emissions (under 1,0), almost all in the undeveloped world.  The figures rise quite highly when you get to developed countries. The UK comes out quite well at 5.6, especially when compared to 10.0 40 years ago.  The USA is 16.1, down from 20.8 in 1980.  Australia is 16.8, an increase since 1980.  Highest emittors appear to include the Arab oil producing countries, perhaps not surprisingly.

 

China?  8.0, up from 1.5 in 1980.  A bit mean to blame India, however - at only 1.9 it doesn't (as yet) really feature among the worse offenders.

 

DT

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

It must be far more productive and far less expensive to have a video conference call !!

 

I have said this for years to a friend who is often flying across the Atlantic despite health issues. But he insists that a face-to-face meeting is so much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...