Shower thoughts

[TheSaint]

5 hours ago, Ben J. Kerman said:

On a different note, I wonder how many people realize that nuclear power plants don't and can't explode like nuclear bombs. 

Not enough, apparently....

[Ryaja]

Why do things promote a lot of wind turbines, this could cause massive climate change and destroy rainforests by changing weather patterns. And nuclear power is so looked down on even though it is one of the cleanest energy sources, we can handle the waste.

[Zozaf Kerman]

Especially the gen 4 nuclear engines that use nuclear waste…

Edited December 26, 2022 by Zozaf Kerman
Typo

[kerbiloid]

Some breeders can, why not.

[Ben J. Kerman]

6 hours ago, Ryaja said:

Why do things promote a lot of wind turbines

The awesome, huge cranes used to build them!

Edited December 26, 2022 by Ben J. Kerman
And the like 50 trucks needed to transport said cranes

[ColdJ]

7 hours ago, Ryaja said:

Why do things promote a lot of wind turbines, this could cause massive climate change and destroy rainforests by changing weather patterns. And nuclear power is so looked down on even though it is one of the cleanest energy sources, we can handle the waste.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh????????????????????????????????????

Things that get moved by the wind don't affect climate change. Things that push air do.

Mostly temperature changes causing high pressure and low pressure zones that air rushes from and to. Cause extreme weather patterns. Build ups of airborn pollution trap solar radiation in some places while weaknesses in the ozone layer allow more radiation in in others. So more violent shifts as the atmosphere tries to even out. This causes extremes in temperature both extreme heat and extreme cold, mixed with high moisture content. The exteme freezing can be witnessed in the news reports coming out of the USA at the moment. While massive floods and land slips due to over saturation can be seen in Australia and Europe.

Wind turbines can take advantage of all this air movement to create power. That power can be used to split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen which can be stored and ignited to produce power in other places with only water as a by product.

Nuclear material needs to be excavated from deep in the ground by machines that pollute. It then needs heavy engineering to be stored and utilised after which it needs more machines and engineering to safely store its waste deep under ground and in water filled containment.

Just because it doesn't release particulate matter into the air, doesn't make it clean.

So I think the turbines are the easier solution.

Hope you are having a good festive season.

[kerbiloid]

6 hours ago, ColdJ said:

Things that get moved by the wind don't affect climate change. Things that push air do.

Air is like water, but air.

https://www.trvst.world/renewable-energy/environmental-impacts-of-hydropower/

Absolutely same, but replace "fishes" with "birds". Other effects are same.

Edited December 26, 2022 by kerbiloid

[Zozaf Kerman]

8 hours ago, ColdJ said:

Things that get moved by the wind don't affect climate change. Things that push air do.

But if the wind is blowing at a turbine, the turbine takes the energy out of the wind, then the wind is not blowing anymore. The place that the wind was blowing to would no longer have wind blowing on it, which could cause some issues and problems, especially if it relies on wind to cool it down.

[Ryaja]

12 hours ago, Ben J. Kerman said:

The awesome, huge cranes used to build them!

Nuclear power plants also need huge cranes. Probably.

[Ben J. Kerman]

21 minutes ago, Ryaja said:

Nuclear power plants also need huge cranes. Probably.

Indeed.

 

[StrandedonEarth]

On 12/23/2022 at 8:43 AM, Ben J. Kerman said:

Rudolph doesn't meet FAA or ICAO regulations, right? First of all, is his nose a beacon or is it meant to act as a landing light, or both? He has no anti-collision or nav lights either, and I bet Santa also loads his sleigh with presents over the MTOW often. Does he file flight plans? Does the sleigh satisfy ETOPS? Is it fitted with GPWS? Does he even have a proper pilot license? How is Santa still allowed to fly around?

 

Santa Claus, like all pilots, gets regular visits from the Federal Aviation Administration, and it was shortly before Christmas when the FAA examiner arrived. 

In preparation, Santa had the elves wash the sled and bathe all the reindeer. Santa got out his logbook and made sure all his paperwork was in order. 

The examiner walked slowly around the sled. He checked the reindeer harnesses, the landing gear, and Rudolph's nose. He painstakingly reviewed Santa's weight and balance calculations for the sled's enormous payload. 

Finally, they were ready for the checkride. Santa got in and fastened his seatbelt and shoulder harness, and checked the compass. Then the examiner hopped in carrying, to Santa's surprise, a shotgun. 

"What's that for?" asked Santa incredulously. 

The examiner winked and said, "I'm not supposed to tell you this, but you're gonna lose an engine on takeoff." 

[Ryaja]

6 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Santa Claus, like all pilots, gets regular visits from the Federal Aviation Administration, and it was shortly before Christmas when the FAA examiner arrived. 

In preparation, Santa had the elves wash the sled and bathe all the reindeer. Santa got out his logbook and made sure all his paperwork was in order. 

The examiner walked slowly around the sled. He checked the reindeer harnesses, the landing gear, and Rudolph's nose. He painstakingly reviewed Santa's weight and balance calculations for the sled's enormous payload. 

Finally, they were ready for the checkride. Santa got in and fastened his seatbelt and shoulder harness, and checked the compass. Then the examiner hopped in carrying, to Santa's surprise, a shotgun. 

"What's that for?" asked Santa incredulously. 

The examiner winked and said, "I'm not supposed to tell you this, but you're gonna lose an engine on takeoff." 

Don't mind me I'm just keeping that one for later

[StrandedonEarth]

1 hour ago, Ryaja said:

Don't mind me I'm just keeping that one for later

I swear I saw an older version where the inspector made Santa fix the nav lights, moving Rudolph off to the side etc. But this version is all I found on short notice.

[Maria Sirona]

Now wait a minute, FAA is an US agency! It doesn't operate in Finland }:(

[kerbiloid]

49 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

Now wait a minute, FAA is an US agency! It doesn't operate in Finland }:(

Then it's not US YOURS, it's THEIRS.

[Gargamel]

I want a car colored dykem blue, but I’m afraid all my coworkers would scratch it off.  

[TheSaint]

9 hours ago, Gargamel said:

I want a car colored dykem blue, but I’m afraid all my coworkers would scratch it off.  

Only the high points....

[Ben J. Kerman]

16 hours ago, Maria Sirona said:

Now wait a minute, FAA is an US agency! It doesn't operate in Finland }:(

I also noted ICAO. I did forget EASA though . Olen pahoillani!

Also on another completely different random thought... I've noticed most of my favorite songs (mostly folk songs, a few patriotic songs and stuff) are from Communist and Socialist countries (Katyusha-USSR, When we were at war-USSR, Allah, Syria, and Bashar-Syria, sort of socialist/dictator-ish I think basically, Oj Alija Aljo-Serbia/Yugoslavia, Footsteps-DPRK, etc.) Now, obviously, what qualifies as 'good music' is subjective, but most people can probably agree that these songs sound good, regardless of the meaning of their lyrics or the things they support. I was thinking, and thought, ~70% joking and 30% seriously, that these songs were all so good because actually living under these governments kind of sucks, so you have to make great songs to forget about the crappy living conditions. I know this probably isn't why, but it's interesting to think about.

Edited December 30, 2022 by Ben J. Kerman

[kerbiloid]

In Katyusha there is absolutely no word about war, only "fighter/soldier" and "border".

Also no word about politics, it's pure lyric.

[ColdJ]

On 12/27/2022 at 1:23 AM, kerbiloid said:

Absolutely same, but replace "fishes" with "birds". Other effects are same.

You would have to have a wall of turbines in a circle around the Earth to even get close. A comparison would require the turbine in the mass flow of water to be the size of a pin.

On 12/27/2022 at 3:15 AM, Zozaf Kerman said:

But if the wind is blowing at a turbine, the turbine takes the energy out of the wind, then the wind is not blowing anymore. The place that the wind was blowing to would no longer have wind blowing on it, which could cause some issues and problems, especially if it relies on wind to cool it down.

Giant cities and mountain ranges can't pull enough energy out of the wind to stop it or even slow it down. So wind turbines certainly won't. Which is a pitty because if they could then we wouldn't get such violent storms.

[kerbiloid]

6 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

On 12/26/2022 at 5:23 PM, kerbiloid said:

Absolutely same, but replace "fishes" with "birds". Other effects are same.

You would have to have a wall of turbines in a circle around the Earth to even get close.

Both hydro-  and wind- turbines just transform the kinetic energy of fluid into electricity.

While their speed is comparable, water is 800 times denser than air, so a hydropower plant is more compact.
The damage which it causes to nature is concentrated, while the damage from windpower plants is at least same but scattered and thus not such obvious.

But both need to stop the same fluid mass for same energy.

Edited December 30, 2022 by kerbiloid

[ColdJ]

2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

The damage which it causes to nature is concentrated, while the damage from windpower plants is at least same but scattered and thus not such obvious.

Hydro takes all the potential energy of gravity pulling the water down in a lake and concentrates it into a tighter tube then blocks that tube with a turbine that spans the tube, so as to get the maximum energy. For wind turbines the lake is the entire Earth and the flow is due to the atmosphere rushing from high pressure zones to low pressure zones in an attempt to achieve equilibrium. So as I said the comparison would have the turbines being the size of a pin. Also the average large wind turbine moves slowly enough to be followed by the naked eye, so only Darwin Award winners would get hit by them.

Once built they only require maintenance to keep going and worn out components over a large time frame can be replaced. Most components can be melted down when worn out and then reformed to be used to make new ones. No need to dig out more from the ground.

So I am failing to see why any one who doesn't have shares in big mining would have a problem with them.

[kerbiloid]

1 minute ago, ColdJ said:

Hydro takes all the potential energy of gravity pulling the water down in a lake and concentrates it into a tighter tube then blocks that tube with a turbine that spans the tube, so as to get the maximum energy. For wind turbines the lake is the entire Earth and the flow is due to the atmosphere rushing from high pressure zones to low pressure zones in an attempt to achieve equilibrium. So as I said the comparison would have the turbines being the size of a pin. Also the average large wind turbine moves slowly enough to be followed by the naked eye, so only Darwin Award winners would get hit by them.

1. The total energy doesn't depend on the way it's extracted. Only total energy value plays a role.
Same generated power is extracted by stopping same kinetic energy per time.

2. The river power is actually an air mass kinetic energy. The air brings the water mass to the top of a mountain and drops it. The potential energy of water on top turns into kinetic energy of water below.
So, a hydroplant is exactly a concetrated air power plant, just using water as a mediator.

3. The air lake is not the whole Earth, but a very cramped area full of windmills, close to the main energy consumers, which are basically concentrated in large cities.
If dismiss the cities and make the spread in cottages, the logistic arm and the building material requirements will grow by an order of magnitude, and this will be much worse.
The areas with stable and strong winds are very specific and not large. Mostly theyr are along the coastline, where the daily gradient of pressure exists constantly and is significant.
So, the damage from the wind power plants is not distributed around the ocean, it's concentrated along the coastal regions,

[ColdJ]

5 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

So, the damage from the wind power plants is not distributed around the ocean, it's concentrated along the coastal regions,

What damage?

Also.

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, ColdJ said:

What damage?

Affect the local wind pattern, the biosphere has been adapted to.

Like the hydroplant affects the fish routes, and their ability to reproduce.