Re: Nuclear energy and hydrogen production

On Feb 5, 12:17 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill wrote:
On Feb 5, 1:02 am, Dan Bloomquist <publi...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
bill wrote:

The biggest obstacle that H2....

Is it does not impact reality. Not now, not until there is a 'cheap'
source of energy other than fossils. Get a brain.
\

Get one yourself, or at least learn to read. This is a
conversation about h2 from NUCLEAR power, the only clean, cheap, non-
fossil power generation method that works in unlimited quantities with
existing tech.

You'll need vast numbers of nuclear power staions to do this.

I calculated a while back that just to move US motor traffic to H2 would need
around 500 one GW nuclear power stations.

Graham

Probably more than that, that sounds low...

But consider that we can very probably make very large reactors for a
fraction of the cost per kilowatt. Say ten 100GW fluid fuel reactors
for making hydrogen. We'd never burn it directly, but we could send it
to FT reactors for upgrading coal, tar, bitumen, or even limestone.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nuclear energy and hydrogen production
    ... source of energy other than fossils. ... conversation about h2 from NUCLEAR power, the only clean, cheap, non- ... You'll need vast numbers of nuclear power staions to do this. ... the moron US motor traffic system anywhere, ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Nuclear energy and hydrogen production
    ... not until there is a 'cheap' ... source of energy other than fossils. ... Get a brain. ... You'll need vast numbers of nuclear power staions to do this. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Nuclear energy and hydrogen production
    ... source of energy other than fossils. ... Get a brain. ... conversation about h2 from NUCLEAR power, the only clean, cheap, non- ... You'll need vast numbers of nuclear power staions to do this. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Time to talk about Global Warming [was Re: Maccies arent fanatical? (by the way, what is a "Macc
    ... if they know what to do with the radioactive wastes involved with nuclear power. ... At one time I advocated for breeder reactors, but the problems of waste disposal still remains. ... Vitrification can immobilize waste for tens out thousands of years, and the high-level wastes that come out of a fast breeder reactor have short enough half lives that they're no more radioactive than naturally occurring stuff after about 300 years. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Time to talk about Global Warming [was Re: Maccies arent fanatical? (by the way, what is a "Macc
    ... plants, to be completed in 15 years, and then a near total phase out of all oil / coal burning in the next 50. ... if they know what to do with the radioactive wastes involved with nuclear power. ... At one time I advocated for breeder reactors, but the problems of waste disposal still remains. ... They'll only work if the scientists first figure out a way to neutralize the waste so that it isn't radioactive. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
Quantcast