Bill Gates To Commit Billions For Clean Energy

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Mr. Gates continues to make the world a better place, one step at a time.

The fund, which one of the sources described as the largest such effort in history, is meant to pay for research and development of new clean-energy technologies. It will include contributions from other billionaires and philanthropies, and a commitment by the United States to double its budget for clean-energy research and development, according to the sources, who asked not to be identified.
 
All of the people whining about carbon, yet nuclear isn't an option for them. Instead, they want unreliable energy sources such as wind and solar.
I'm fine with using other technologies, but you don't have sunlight at night and if the wind isn't blowing, no power.
There are a lot of new reactor designs now. They are supposed to reduce the radioactive waste (which I'll admit is a problem).
 
Gates should invest in nuclear fusion, that is what we need for clean energy that is reliable.
 
Yes because centralized power plants built buy multibillion dollar energy companies totally need help.

seriously, you throw in billions for a fund you can say it's all for nuclear as long as you want.
 
Nuclear waste disposal has been resolved but when Obama got into office he stopped Yucca Mountain where the disposal site has already been prepared. My dad spent decades working on that project and in one fell swoop, it was stopped because Harry Reid does not want the nuclear waste in his state.

Nuclear energy is the only true clean energy on the planet that is reliable.
 
tbonepat11 said:
Nuclear waste disposal has been resolved but when Obama got into office he stopped Yucca Mountain where the disposal site has already been prepared. My dad spent decades working on that project and in one fell swoop, it was stopped because Harry Reid does not want the nuclear waste in his state.

Nuclear energy is the only true clean energy on the planet that is reliable.
Click to expand...

Nuclear energy can be reliable, and it can be safe. I agree it's a better alternative than coal, but still NOBODY wants nuclear waste in their state. NOBODY!
And that is the big downside of nuclear energy, the nuclear waste. And it's BIG!

But hey, if you volunteer to store it in your basement, I'm ok with that!
 
ep0x73 said:
Gates should invest in nuclear fusion, that is what we need for clean energy that is reliable.
Click to expand...

Fusion is probably never going to happen. Fusion is barely self sustaining let alone able to produce power. Regular nuclear power is just fine so long as we're careful about it.

In most households you can use solar to meet most of your power needs. We just need a good battery to hold all that power that's made during the day. Wind power works so well that 39% of electricity production in Denmark is wind.

If we use nuclear in the future it would be to feed power when solar or wind aren't producing enough, but mostly for businesses as they probably can't rely on that type of power source.
 
Breeder Fission reactors are able to consume most of the their own waste. And they cannot "melt down". This is where people should be looking right now.

The ITER is an multi-national project to built a functional Fusion reactor. This is where the future should be looking.
 
DukenukemX said:
Fusion is probably never going to happen. Fusion is barely self sustaining let alone able to produce power. Regular nuclear power is just fine so long as we're careful about it.

In most households you can use solar to meet most of your power needs. We just need a good battery to hold all that power that's made during the day. Wind power works so well that 39% of electricity production in Denmark is wind.

If we use nuclear in the future it would be to feed power when solar or wind aren't producing enough, but mostly for businesses as they probably can't rely on that type of power source.
Click to expand...

I still question the long term effects of us gathering solar and wind energy. This is energy that was doing something previously. There could be unforeseen consequences if "renewable" energy takes off as many politicians like to describe. You never know, other countries could "steal" your wind in Denmark....and then what?
 
Meeho said:
It they don't include nuclear it's all but useless.
Click to expand...

Gates has been involved in funding clean nuc for at least the last 5 years (probably longer). Surprisingly, the work is being developed by Intellectual Ventures, everyone's favorite patent troll. The work is under a different company name, which I don't recall.
 
From the link.

With support from a roster of investors that includes Khosla Ventures, Bill Gates and Charles River Ventures, TerraPower is refining its TWR design and expects to build a test reactor within the next decade. The company is also producing valuable research on fast reactors and pioneering materials development for advanced nuclear energy systems.
Click to expand...
 
we should dump nuclear and go back to coal or LNG or whatever else makes sense.

i could care less about climate politics. that's all a ruse to keep developing nations at heel, and for developing nations to extract money from developed nations. whichever way the money flows, the corrupt powers-that-be will be skimming off the top.

any time you have the elite and establishment backing something so vociferously and in perfect rhyme, you know they're up to no good. and it always involves some kind of global politics.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Nuclear energy can be reliable, and it can be safe. I agree it's a better alternative than coal, but still NOBODY wants nuclear waste in their state. NOBODY!
And that is the big downside of nuclear energy, the nuclear waste. And it's BIG!

But hey, if you volunteer to store it in your basement, I'm ok with that!
Click to expand...

what you say is very true and also an unfortunate misunderstanding. people figure that the waste will be dangerous, pollute water sources, etc. this couldn't be further from the truth. waste fuel is sealed inside very thick steel casks and the lid welded on. then those casks are stored under guard. problems are pretty much nothing and close to impossible. but hey, the public won't listen to logic. that's been proven over and over again.

i'm hoping that this investment will go towards developing new reactors that are currently considered experimental. the kind where we can 'burn' the waste fuel efficiently and safely. that would also take care of this waste problem....the further the fuel is burned in a reactor, the less radioactive it becomes. the end state is lead, the closer we can get to that the better. plus the fact that its already mined and ready to go doesn't hurt either.
 
Am I the only one that read "clean energy"? Nuclear is not clean today, maybe someday. Even if you do something awesome people complain. Hope my 3$ to salvation money is not as heavily dissed.
 
jwcalla said:
we should dump nuclear and go back to coal or LNG or whatever else makes sense.

i could care less about climate politics. that's all a ruse to keep developing nations at heel, and for developing nations to extract money from developed nations. whichever way the money flows, the corrupt powers-that-be will be skimming off the top.

any time you have the elite and establishment backing something so vociferously and in perfect rhyme, you know they're up to no good. and it always involves some kind of global politics.
Click to expand...

The only thing that makes sense in that bold portion is that you make no sense. You don't seem to have any idea how dangerous coal is to our lungs, nature (other living things), climate/atmosphere. It is worse and dirtier than even oil, and oil is a mess as it is. When 40% of our electricity comes from coal, it's a problem. What you're asking for is to essentially go back to the stone age of electricity & stay there.

Coal is the first thing that must go. Permanently. It should have been gone 20-30 years ago when evidence showed the dangers of it, yet we are still debating what to do with coal today. Oil must go 2nd. Natural gas should go too but not before coal is completely gone - natural gas is much cleaner than coal and somewhat cleaner than oil.
 
ep0x73 said:
Gates should invest in nuclear fusion, that is what we need for clean energy that is reliable.
Click to expand...

Right now nuclear fusion is one of those technologies that's perpetually "10-20 years away".
It also isn't helping that our current generation capacity and stability is only marginally better than "perpetual rolling blackouts".

What we need right now is a decent Fission baseline, which we can then augment with renewables and storage capacity where it makes sense.

But what we need worth of all? A national power grid. Preferably something that's set up to take energy input anywhere along the connection.

So, once we have a nice, stable, pretty much uninterruptible power infrastructure, we can THEN go chasing things like fusion with a MUCH better ability to provide the power such work requires.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Yes because centralized power plants built buy multibillion dollar energy companies totally need help.

seriously, you throw in billions for a fund you can say it's all for nuclear as long as you want.
Click to expand...

Well, what do YOU propose? A windmill and acres of solar panels on every roof? Regardless of if such an installation makes SENSE?

Face it, Solar and Wind simply don't have the same energy density nuclear does. Meaning that, for equivalent levels of power output, facility size would scale up. Meaning Solar and Wind would require more land use, and disrupt larger portions of the local ecology.
 
tbonepat11 said:
Nuclear waste disposal has been resolved but when Obama got into office he stopped Yucca Mountain where the disposal site has already been prepared. My dad spent decades working on that project and in one fell swoop, it was stopped because Harry Reid does not want the nuclear waste in his state.

Nuclear energy is the only true clean energy on the planet that is reliable.
Click to expand...

Honestly, storage for tens and hundreds of thousands of years was a DUMB idea to begin with.

First off, while we can guarantee an engineered structure for several hundred years, I seriously doubt that any structure built by modern architecture is up to multi-millennial periods of usage.

Second, most of the fuel being stowed is still perfectly good, usable fuel. But reprocessing is illegal in the US due to proliferation risks.

Third, most of the stuff IS so long lived because it's only mildly radioactive.
We have the technology to build reactors that put out far smaller amounts of, admittedly MUCH more highly radioactive substances. On the plus side, things that highly active are relatively short-lived (radiologically speaking). So, any waste might only need to be stored for a few decades. Rather than longer than recorded history.
 
rageFIST said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power i could deal with meltdown proof nuclear i think

Calling nuclear clean is ludicrous though. Even "safe" storage sites, because of geological changes over thousands of years.
Click to expand...

Many of the byproducts of the thorium reaction cycle are either medically or scientifically useful.

Most of the rest is more radiologically active than current fission power byproducts. However, radiological activity and radiological duration (half-life) tend to be inversely proportional.
 
aShrubbery! said:
Nuclear energy can be reliable, and it can be safe. I agree it's a better alternative than coal, but still NOBODY wants nuclear waste in their state. NOBODY!
And that is the big downside of nuclear energy, the nuclear waste. And it's BIG!

But hey, if you volunteer to store it in your basement, I'm ok with that!
Click to expand...

Given proper engineering in thorium/Molten Salt reactors, you only need to keep byproducts for a few decades. A few centuries for the least radioactive byproducts.

And where do you think a lot of the current fuel byproduct is right now?

Sitting in sealed casks on-premises, sometimes out in OPEN AIR PARKING LOTS!

And nobody's falling over dead with radiation sickness/cancer/etc because of it.
 
DukenukemX said:
Fusion is probably never going to happen. Fusion is barely self sustaining let alone able to produce power. Regular nuclear power is just fine so long as we're careful about it.

In most households you can use solar to meet most of your power needs. We just need a good battery to hold all that power that's made during the day. Wind power works so well that 39% of electricity production in Denmark is wind.

If we use nuclear in the future it would be to feed power when solar or wind aren't producing enough, but mostly for businesses as they probably can't rely on that type of power source.
Click to expand...

The term you're looking for is "baseline" power or, as it's colloquially known today, "brown power".

Renewable/storage would be used to cover bumps in demand.
 
Nothing wrong with coal that isn't a politically motivated government power & money grab.
 
My country's economy is 100% dependant on coal burning. Sure, we tune them up with filtering stages and so on, but it's dirty as hell.
As someone who's been given Lugol's Iodine as a child after Chernobyl, I welcome our nuclear overlords and wouldn't mind having the reactor building in my garden.
Chernobyl isn't even an argument.
- there was no secondary bio-shield because money, that would stop the post-meltdown contamination in its tracks
- the graphite rods were almost completely retracted from the core via manual override due to an incorrect assumption regarding Xeon poisoning. When SCRAM was initiated, the rods wouldn't go down and thus limit the reaction because the rod channels were warped due to extreme runaway temperatures
- the experiment that led to the ultimate meltdown was a bit crazy, but it would also provide critical data on what to do when the pumps fail. The experiment itself was still sane, but they were so keen on doing it on one go that they gradually relaxed all safety measures due to what jet figther pilots call 'boresight' - focusing on one part of the picture and rejecting or misinterpreting the whole picture
- RBMK 1000 had a positive void coefficient. Newer designs, inculding Thorium, are a whole different animal

Fukushima happened because of a tsunami. Poland is tectonically stable, has plenty of highlands, relatively weak winds, no (large) tornadoes.
I think my government is being a huge hypocrite because we do have an active 30MW reactor- Maria (after Sklodowska-Curie). Oddly enough noone considers this one a threat even though spent fuel is kept in-plant in a water filled container separated from the main cooling reservoir.
I'm no doctor, but until we have nano-photovoltaics than can turn infrared into voltage, or that bloody fusion, countries like my Poland should go nuclear so as to not to emit coal crap.
Maybe build some dams and use water to supplement.
 
Wind and solar can't meet the demands of the current populace if we switched over to it. Thus, the price to the consumer will be higher for these forms of energy. Perfect! Automatic increase in tax revenue for the government without doing a damn thing. :rolleyes:
 
michalrz said:
My country's economy is 100% dependant on coal burning. Sure, we tune them up with filtering stages and so on, but it's dirty as hell.
As someone who's been given Lugol's Iodine as a child after Chernobyl, I welcome our nuclear overlords and wouldn't mind having the reactor building in my garden.
Chernobyl isn't even an argument.
- there was no secondary bio-shield because money, that would stop the post-meltdown contamination in its tracks
- the graphite rods were almost completely retracted from the core via manual override due to an incorrect assumption regarding Xeon poisoning. When SCRAM was initiated, the rods wouldn't go down and thus limit the reaction because the rod channels were warped due to extreme runaway temperatures
- the experiment that led to the ultimate meltdown was a bit crazy, but it would also provide critical data on what to do when the pumps fail. The experiment itself was still sane, but they were so keen on doing it on one go that they gradually relaxed all safety measures due to what jet figther pilots call 'boresight' - focusing on one part of the picture and rejecting or misinterpreting the whole picture
- RBMK 1000 had a positive void coefficient. Newer designs, inculding Thorium, are a whole different animal

Fukushima happened because of a tsunami. Poland is tectonically stable, has plenty of highlands, relatively weak winds, no (large) tornadoes.
I think my government is being a huge hypocrite because we do have an active 30MW reactor- Maria (after Sklodowska-Curie). Oddly enough noone considers this one a threat even though spent fuel is kept in-plant in a water filled container separated from the main cooling reservoir.
I'm no doctor, but until we have nano-photovoltaics than can turn infrared into voltage, or that bloody fusion, countries like my Poland should go nuclear so as to not to emit coal crap.
Maybe build some dams and use water to supplement.
Click to expand...

hit the nail on the head ;) the design of the chernobyl RBMK was a bad joke. they basically built the reactor inside a freaking warehouse with zero containment...bad idea. it's not just that it had a positive void coefficient, its that it had a MASSIVE void coefficient. other reactors do have a slightly positive void (such as the CANDU) but nowhere near this. they also have secondary shutdown systems, advanced containment, etc.

chernobyl was really caused by one man (who subsequently went to jail and died there of a heart attack for it) who wanted the test done as fast as possible. this happened over a shift changeover where information was not relayed properly. the control panel operator actually refused to initiate the test - and was told he would lose his job for it. they got someone else in there to push the button and told him either do this or lose your job.

sometimes unions can be good...
 
THRESHIN said:
hit the nail on the head ;) the design of the chernobyl RBMK was a bad joke. they basically built the reactor inside a freaking warehouse with zero containment...bad idea. it's not just that it had a positive void coefficient, its that it had a MASSIVE void coefficient. other reactors do have a slightly positive void (such as the CANDU) but nowhere near this. they also have secondary shutdown systems, advanced containment, etc.

chernobyl was really caused by one man (who subsequently went to jail and died there of a heart attack for it) who wanted the test done as fast as possible. this happened over a shift changeover where information was not relayed properly. the control panel operator actually refused to initiate the test - and was told he would lose his job for it. they got someone else in there to push the button and told him either do this or lose your job.

sometimes unions can be good...
Click to expand...

Chernobyl was basically the result of a clusterfuck of minor errors that I omitted in my post.
The Graphite tips were badly designed and displaced the coolant during SCRAM. This further supported the excursion.
The test was postponed by IIRC 2 or 3 hours because Kiev grid controllers demanded more power during 'peak evening demand'. A nuclear plant performing a crucial and risky test should not yield to such commands. But, there was noone at the plant with enough authority to reject the grid control's orders. As the 1 am shift change approached, many minor manual 'tweaks' were not passed onto the next shift, and the shift that was to perform the test was already tired by the time they received the green light to go full retard. Even though, for some reason, they did follow along with disabling pumps and performing other tasks which were badly timed.
The reactor crew did not posess enough authority and balls to cordon-off sites from which visual contact was possible into the melting core. The bridge of death from which people could see into the 'pretty colours' was also the place where penetrating Gamma radiation was free to roam. It should have been cordoned off. People shouldn't have been forced to attend a parade the next day. Clean up crews should not have attempted to deal with the fallout as it were dust - much of their efforts caused further particles to become airborne.
Honestly, all that was required was a secondary shield - which would have contained the disaster after the second explosion (or was it the first?) threw the 20 000 tonnes reactor lid through the roof. The last verifiable readout was 30 000 something MW of thermal power. However it is still unknown who initiated the SCRAM which displaced enough coolant for the excursion to kick off. It's not known if it would have gone boom if SCRAM weren't initiated.

However, when the 'authorities' got their heads out of their asses and evacuated the town of Pripyat, it was a perfect operation.

I bow to all the bio-robots and the liquidators. Those who knowingly entered the underground pool to assess the damage and were killed by the 'elephant's foot' lavas' radiation. Look at the photos - there was enough radiation to overexpose the negatives... And yet those people would not give up. They ran around the roof collecting molten pieces, they employed makeshift robots (which succumbed to gamma!), they poured liquid nitrogen to prevent the third explosion. These were not idiots. They knew what ionizing radiation was. I bow to the pilots of helicopters that were brazen enough to fly over the reactor to douse it with borium, lead, sand.
Remember this medal and know what it stands for - those people saved our asses after their higher-ups fucked up.

 
Also, some do's and don'ts for all you wannabe stalkers.
- you buy your own Geiger Counter. You do NOT use the ones provided on-site. They are old and degraded by radiation exposure. They are miscalibrated. Some of them don't work at all. You carry your own and you can even test it by bringing it to a heap of coal. Coal is slightly radioactive, if your counter clicks - you're good to go.
- you first setup a contact on the inside, preferrably military. That way you save thousands of dollars on bribes
- do not copy moronic trends like approaching the ferris wheel, vehicles and other metal objects. Not without your counter in hand.
- do not pick anything up from the ground. The dust containst alpha and beta emitting particles, and your counter will probably pick their radiation only when it's in close proximity. Thus - all your crew needs a counter, because the radiation hot-spots can be like a meter wide. You carry the counter close to the ground. You do not shuffle your feet. As soon as winds increase of some moron kicks the ground releasing dust - you get the fuck away. Alpha and Beta emitting particles are dangerous when they contact with skin or enter your lungs. The counter will show you normal background radiation, but there's still the risk of inhaling the wrong dust-bunny.
You do not go up to rooftops. They are dust-ridden.
You do not enter the Red Forest. There was a fire there recently which must have sent a lot of radio crap into the air. Watch your wind. Do not drink vodka, this is not a video game and all it does is causes you to urinate so a little bit of crap can exit your body.
Stock up on water and food in Kiev (there;s a bus from Kiev to the Zona, it's only around 60 kilometers to the edge of the Zona).
Get multiple pairs of high leather water-proof boots and tie them up tight. Baggy pants. Push your pants' legs into the boot and secure it tightly. Wipe your boots from time to time with a damp cloth on a stick. Throw away said stick and cloth.
My friend is a x-ray technician for a few dental clinics. He once helped to calibrate a newly setup x-ray machine. He chose himself as the test monkey, taking enough pictures of his mug to actually make his eyes pinch and his face felt odd.
As soon as you feel there's something up with your eyes, you need to get the fuck out immediately. Should you puke later in the day, you are entering stage I of radiation sickness. Eat iodine. Replenish fluids, change clothes, shower. Wait for the 'silent stage' and rush to the hospital before the silent stage ends and Stage II begins (this usually takes 3 days IIRC). You do not ignore those minor discomforts. Do you know why you feel nauseaous? It's because the chromosomes in your intestines are already shattered and you need extensive anti-rad treatment, preferably in neighbouring Poland or Kiev.
- you need gloves and head cover. accidentally picking up some random dirt uinder your fingernail is already a hige risk - if you got the 'wrong' dust you are now receiving constant Alpha/Beta irradiation.

Zona is a tourist attraction because the corrupt staff has allowed it to become one. They live off bribes and often have a cowboy attitude to show off and because they fell victim to Routine.
Also, remember that block 4 is no longer this eerie frozen in time image. A new sarcophagus was already built and rolled onto the first containment vessel.
Don't be fooled by the youtube flicks showing Block Four personnell walking around the inside of the core's remains. They have protective gear and are highly trained.
It's still a dangerous place.
Even though Poland was mostly missed by the cloud of fallout, most Polish citizens who lived during that period suffer some kind of thyroid issues. My mother had cancer, and has a TSH level of 0.1. I have TSH around 0.9. The norm being 0.5-5.0. My aunt just had her thyroid removed this year with adjacent lymph nodes. At least 1/4th of my job colleagues have some kind of Thyroid related problem.
 
THRESHIN said:
nice to see that people are finally figuring this out ;)
Click to expand...

Not out here in California.
We are going to power all our electric cars using unicorn farts and pixy dust.

They are currently trying to shut down the last nuclear plant in the state by making it too expensive to renew their operating license.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top