Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia to install 4 floating nuclear plants in northeast Siberia
RIA Novosti ^ | 11/ 03/ 2009

Posted on 03/11/2009 4:03:48 AM PDT by pobeda1945

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: gridlock

See answer above (Nbr 20)


21 posted on 03/11/2009 6:23:11 AM PDT by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw
Sometimes the water gets too warm and the fish health is compromised.

I haven’t noted any greater number of diseased fish caught in these warm water discharge areas than other areas.

If anything the fish are larger and healthier.

22 posted on 03/11/2009 7:37:18 AM PDT by Pontiac (Your message here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer
Yucca has been planned for years, looked pretty dead and stable to me... where they puttin it now?

In indoor pools or outside in concrete sarcophaguses.

23 posted on 03/11/2009 7:39:43 AM PDT by Pontiac (Your message here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pobeda1945

It looks like a riverboat casino. They have great buffets.


24 posted on 03/11/2009 7:41:28 AM PDT by x_plus_one (A thousand suckers are born every minute. They are the Obamacracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pobeda1945

25 posted on 03/11/2009 7:43:32 AM PDT by dfwgator (1996 2006 2008 - Good Things Come in Threes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

If anything the fish are larger and healthier.

I mentioned it because here in Illinois, the Clinton N-Power plant discharges into the man made Clinton Reservoir. The fish appear healthy but devoid of the deep color of healthy fish and many are infested with worms. Of course I’ve seen this in the supposedly cold waters in southern Canada also. The water temp around the plant is in the low 80°F range.


26 posted on 03/11/2009 7:50:23 AM PDT by chainsaw (If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! -- P.J..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw

Power plants could put all the waste heat to use by using evaporation ponds. This would leverage solar energy to transport fresh water to a higher location where the extra energy can eventually be harvested by hydro dams. It also supports more plant life to convert CO2 to O2 and food. This in turn supports more fish and wild life. The right kind of clouds can provide major climate cooling in the form of shade or warming in the form of a blanket. Rather than new carbon taxes earmarked for socialist money pits, building evaporation ponds would actually do something useful for planet Earth.


27 posted on 03/11/2009 8:07:10 AM PDT by Reeses (Leftism is powered by the evil force of envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Why, that looks like some kind of Superfish!


28 posted on 03/11/2009 8:14:17 AM PDT by gridlock (BTW, Mods... It might be time to add "Barack" and "Obama" to spellcheck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
Power plants could put all the waste heat to use by using evaporation ponds.

How would an evaporation pond serve a different function than the currently used evaporative cooling towers?


29 posted on 03/11/2009 9:06:06 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Maybe I’m wrong but I think those are engineered to cool volumes of water to a certain point. An evaporation pond can be engineered to combine solar and wind energy with waste heat for maximum cloud production.

Nature converts much of the heat released into it by cities and factories into extra evaporation. It’s known that rainfall is substantially higher 20 miles downwind of heat islands. It’s just that the process is not optimized to convert the maximum amount of waste energy into something useful, such as more clouds and rain from saltwater.


30 posted on 03/11/2009 10:07:58 AM PDT by Reeses (Leftism is powered by the evil force of envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
I've stood inside one of those while it was operating.

The natural draft created by the heat and geometry is FAR larger than the average wind, not to mention that they are splashing down though millions of cups mixing the air directly with the water creating a huge surface area to volume ratio when compared with a pond.

I would be VERY surprised if someone could show more moisture going into the air by a pond and creating the same necessary cooling effect for the power plant.

Adding a solar heat load would only make the process more inefficient as the actual need is cooling the water.

31 posted on 03/11/2009 11:08:04 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thackney

A brake on a wheel is engineered to waste motion energy as efficiently and cheaply as possible. You could also pay extra and convert the energy into something that could be reused. I’m sure it makes no economic sense to use evaporation ponds rather than cooling towers but I’m speculating that would be better than paying a climate change tax. If a coal plant can create extra shade clouds, rain, lush plant growth, and bubble CO2 through biofuel algae ponds too, they shouldn’t have to pay a climate change tax.


32 posted on 03/11/2009 11:31:18 AM PDT by Reeses (Leftism is powered by the evil force of envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
A brake on a wheel is engineered to waste motion energy as efficiently and cheaply as possible.

Cheaply and effectively, but efficiently? This is by definition burning off energy and not recovered. Only a hybrid regenerative braking takes efficiency into account.

I’m sure it makes no economic sense to use evaporation ponds rather than cooling towers but I’m speculating that would be better than paying a climate change tax. If a coal plant can create extra shade clouds, rain, lush plant growth, and bubble CO2 through biofuel algae ponds too, they shouldn’t have to pay a climate change tax.

The point you are missing is that creating clouds and rain and corresponding plant growth would not be improved by using a pond instead of a natural draft cooling tower. Bubbling CO2 requires a CO2 capture system, a total separate and VERY expensive system that also reduces total plant efficiency. Reducing total plant efficiency means burning more coal to produce the same amount of power. Unless the algae is kept in its form forever, it doesn't capture the C02, it only moves it through another process first before it is released to the atmoshpere.

33 posted on 03/12/2009 6:58:11 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson