Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73

Thread: Nuclear power and changes

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3,807
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Magnitised Target Fusion

    Never heard of this approach before - uses a unique method of plasma confinement within a spinning sphere of liquid metal and mechanical compression of the plasma.

    Scroll down and watch the video to see how it 'works'. General Fusion: Technology Demonstration

    They want to build a demo plant so I'm sure they would like some investment $$$$$$$$ if anybody is that way inclined.
    2011 D4 3.0 SDV6
    1999 D2 V8, in heaven
    1984 RRC, in hell

  2. #12
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferret View Post
    Never heard of this approach before - uses a unique method of plasma confinement within a spinning sphere of liquid metal and mechanical compression of the plasma.

    Scroll down and watch the video to see how it 'works'. General Fusion: Technology Demonstration

    They want to build a demo plant so I'm sure they would like some investment $$$$$$$$ if anybody is that way inclined.
    Today's news
    We can thank the amazing research at Australia Nuclear reactor in Sydney- World first in Silex Laser proof now. "SILEX Laser Isotope Separation (LIS) technology was invented by Silex Systems scientists Dr Michael Goldsworthy and Dr Horst Struve in the 1990's at " you guessed it Lucas Heights (Trivia- a school mate of mine built Lucas Heights) test report

    In other news Australia is slow and going to pay for it? "AEMO warns of power 'gaps' in Australia's biggest grid within three years as coal exodus gathers pace"



    Overseas news shows some uncommon common sense now
    Why even environmentalists are supporting nuclear power today : NPR "Why even environmentalists are supporting nuclear power today"


    Here Greens have yet to understand a few key facts. There is not nearly enough materials to replace all current power needs world wide. (Copper in particular) reference.

    20220830.jpg This is not by a fluffy me. The geologist that did it is on the money I think



    How to power my Business for longer grid failure periods in Australia is on my mind right now?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Cooroy, QLD
    Posts
    1,383
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I'm eyerolling so hard I gave myself a brain hemorrhage. What nonsense.

  4. #14
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    28,806
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Yet another lot who does not understand what the term "reserves" means.

    Let's explain this again. In mining, "reserves" is a legal term (to protect investors) that is defined to mean the quantity of a mineral that has been proved to exist by drilling or other accepted means to exist, that can be recovered economically (i.e. showing a profit) using today's technology and today's prices. It is only very tenuously related to "resources", which is the quantity of a mineral that is inferred (with varying confidence) to exist, that can be technically recovered.

    It says nothing about the quantity of a mineral that is actually able to be recovered in the future. And it is worth noting that it is not worth any company carrying out work to find and prove reserves unless it can be shown that the probable reserve will have a DCF* rate of return greater than the company's hurdle* rate.

    No (reputable) company is going to explore for minerals unless these criteria are met, so if there is plenty of a mineral known, there is no incentive to look for it. And if the demand is changing rapidly, the risks involved are very high, so even if it looks like there will be a shortage, exploration is unlikely. This applies especially to minerals (such as lithium) where inferred resources are far greater than reserves.

    *DCF = Discounted Cash Flow, that is the cash flow from mining the reserve, discounted for the lead time and amount of investment prior to production. This is very sensitive to predicted mineral price and interest rate, and the estimated risk attached to proving the reserve, changes in interest rate, changes in price, delays in production, and sovereign risk.

    Hurdle rate = the minimum return the organisation expects from an investment. It is sensitive to the predicted interest rate, and varies between organisations depending on their circumstances and alternative investments.
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  5. #15
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    Yet another lot who does not understand what the term "reserves" means.

    Let's explain this again. In mining, "reserves" is a legal term (to protect investors) that is defined to mean the quantity of a mineral that has been proved to exist by drilling or other accepted means to exist, that can be recovered economically (i.e. showing a profit) using today's technology and today's prices. It is only very tenuously related to "resources", which is the quantity of a mineral that is inferred (with varying confidence) to exist, that can be technically recovered.

    It says nothing about the quantity of a mineral that is actually able to be recovered in the future. And it is worth noting that it is not worth any company carrying out work to find and prove reserves unless it can be shown that the probable reserve will have a DCF* rate of return greater than the company's hurdle* rate.

    No (reputable) company is going to explore for minerals unless these criteria are met, so if there is plenty of a mineral known, there is no incentive to look for it. And if the demand is changing rapidly, the risks involved are very high, so even if it looks like there will be a shortage, exploration is unlikely. This applies especially to minerals (such as lithium) where inferred resources are far greater than reserves.

    *DCF = Discounted Cash Flow, that is the cash flow from mining the reserve, discounted for the lead time and amount of investment prior to production. This is very sensitive to predicted mineral price and interest rate, and the estimated risk attached to proving the reserve, changes in interest rate, changes in price, delays in production, and sovereign risk.

    Hurdle rate = the minimum return the organisation expects from an investment. It is sensitive to the predicted interest rate, and varies between organisations depending on their circumstances and alternative investments.
    Not my work on reserves an honestly found on tweeter link so apologies if it is invalid. I am buying resources BHP in particular when is was what I felt is very over sold. Add it is Australia's biggest actual uranium miner at present. Its copper and other little items are in demand as well.

    Note re retail investment like little me ( cannon fodder?) and institutional investment local here and the Big guys. One part is sort of us- Super. Noticed "Net super contributions surge past $63bn
    The superannuation industry has recorded a surge of 88 per cent in net contributions over the year to June 30"

    63 billion Per year needing to be invested goes............ Liquidity means much of that has to go to NYSE or LSE as we are a bit of a minnow and a billion here or there makes huge unwanted market turmoil in thin turnover markets.

    Our super investment are almost insignificant compared the EU and ............. Watching those large capital flows is not always rocket science happily.

    I often get far ahead of reality - Tiger resources was a copper tragic in DRC for example.

    Currently have +50% gains in Canadian and much more in an Australian company or two. Note I sold my fav C.S.L. to do that.

    Suspect Canadian which mines and also does other aspects of the fuel cycle is priced very cheaply and could be safest direct of EFTs another more broadly spaced and paced investment.

    Predictions and risks are not always clear until after events.. All that glitters is not gold is the best rule to always remember

    Good night all

  6. #16
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Two things jumped up today. One was 25 year old solar panels in California at end of life and the other was that 50% of all carbon free power in the US is from Nuclear

    After billions++++ of $ solar is just 7%
    After billions of $++++ Wind is just 25%
    Others were geothermal 1% and Hydro 17% link to American government twitter on this

    Point is had those Billions gone into New Nuclear California would not be in blackouts, brown outs and significant shortages yesterday and today.

    I am getting the papers on this to read from a student with access happily "Lasers could cut lifespan of nuclear waste from “a million years to 30 minutes,” says Nobel laureate


    Physicist plans to karate-chop them with super-fast blasts of light."

    Solutions needed of course.

  7. #17
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0
    My waffle on a issue between types of mining and my thoughts on a issue to do with one type of mining

    not investment advice!!!

    Acid is interesting to several mining process by the way
    https://twitter.com/NavyDiver12/stat...j30ZeREkGlDSaw

  8. #18
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Single Cycle Laser SYLOS

    Found it and it is in progress with boffins still Single Cycle Laser SYLOS

    SYLOS is not my favourite SILEX Laser tech at all. Any one else hate acronyms?

    Oddly acronyms might be clear than the science in scientific terms?


    Just when you think you might have it along comes "SYLOS 2 "

    Just in case I am confusing as usual this is ongoing research in to SYLOS which may soon have Nuclear waste being safe in minutes. That seems to me to be worth watching with interest.

  9. #19
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0

    A billion year test of Nuclear waste

    This is very very cool


    Two billion years ago— eons before humans developed the first commercial nuclear power plants in the 1950s— seventeen natural nuclear fission reactors operated in what is today known as **on in Western Africa [Figures 1 and 2]. The energy produced by these natural nuclear reactors was modest. The average power output of the **on reactors was about 100 kilowatts, which would power about 1,000 lightbulbs. As a comparison, commercial pressurized boiling water reactor nuclear power plants produce about 1,000 megawatts, which would power about ten million lightbulbs.

    Did I mention I love Science

    PS I was trained in fear Plus of Nuclear war during the Cold war. Understand reasons for fear is needed.

    Have a great weekend all
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...estern-africa/


    Another very informative review on Nuclear waste where I first heard about this billion year old event! A week at Chernobyl or a week in Beijing when its air pollution is at a peak was a consideration everyone needs to think of in terms of health and nuclear waste. Not suggesting go to Chernobyl while there is a war on!

    The historical natural nuclear reactions in Africa was one I had no idea about. Great to be able to study its impacts now


  10. #20
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,362
    Total Downloaded
    0

    How much more? Lots and Lots

    Right now it is impossible to imagine The US Government, Bill Gates /Terra Power, Rolls- Royce, Nuscale Power Corp and others missing the fact they all have a very very short time frame for the HALEU fuel side of their rapidly accelerating plans.

    How much extra Uranium needed is about to be demonstrated but only when the price incentive is assured and contracted for miners.

    I waffle a bit https://twitter.com/NavyDiver12/stat...YnzymvdJOGRnUw

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!