Burn yo trash!

Vampire_Hunter_Bob

Cats are great
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061213/sc_afp/skoreaenvironmentenergy_061213083922

SEOUL (AFP) - South Korea has opened the world's largest garbage-fuelled power plant and expects to reduce its imports of heavy oil by 500,000 barrels a year as a result.

ADVERTISEMENT

The 50-megawatt plant, designed to provide power to more than 180,000 households, began operating on Tuesday. It sits on a mammoth garbage dump in the city of Incheon west of Seoul, the ministry said in a statement.

For fuel, it uses only the methane gas naturally generated from the decomposing garbage on the site.

This might not be as big as "Kramer is racist" or "indian men have small willies", but it is deemed news worthy to me because it's a step towards getting our [heroin] oil addiction under control for good!
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
That's a really good initiative.

This might be the answer to the shortage of rough oils etc..

I think nuclear plants are the answer to that. I can't believe people haven't yet realized it.
 
Well there isnt enough Uranium for this to last longer then we could last out of rough oils (well maybe we could considering a reactor runs for about 20 years on 1 load)

I think either wind-sun-water energy or Cold-fusion is the future..

(or an infinite source of power, maybe when we invent solarpannels which absorb 100% of the emmited light it would be attached to)
 
Here's the problem with Nuclear: Where do you put all of the waste? The U.S. has been building Yuca mountain's storage facility for years but even if the facility was ready today if the U.S. put all of the waste intended for Yuca mountain it would be full. [bleh! Too lazy to look up article] But more pertinent to France, didn't several plants have to shut down in '03 during the heat wave due to lack of water? Remember that water is a recource readily needed by power plants. It is also about to become a limited resource as freshwater sources are running out because the rain water that would replenish them can't trickle down because of paved highways or becausethe water is being consumed too quickly. Nuclear is not a sustainable option. I understand why so many people say that green alternatives don't work, there isn't enough power generated by them to support the needs of many major cities, but this is an ofshoot of a larger problem. ie. Limited resources. The world isn't spending it's limited resources wisely and there is going to be a major change in lifestyle and economics once the fuel shortage really hits.
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
chaoscontrol said:
Well there isnt enough Uranium for this to last longer then we could last out of rough oils (well maybe we could considering a reactor runs for about 20 years on 1 load)

Yeah, I think I'll go ahead and not take your word for this.

Rage Incarnate said:
Here's the problem with Nuclear: Where do you put all of the waste? The U.S. has been building Yuca mountain's storage facility for years but even if the facility was ready today if the U.S. put all of the waste intended for Yuca mountain it would be full.

Well then obviously, more facilities are needed, or maybe constructing them needs to become a priority (which it hasn't been). That'd help reduce unemployment too. Jobs for everyone. It's nothing impossible to achieve, and no matter what the pollution on a general level will be less than what current power plants in the USA are producing (Coal-burning plants? Please...). Most notably greenhouse gases. You know, there's one nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in France which amounts for half of the world's nuclear fuel reprocessing capacity. It has been in activity since 1976 and takes care of wastes from France, Japan, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Holland. Are you telling me that 30 years later, the USA can't do better, or even as well? In any case as you surely know a new nuclear plant is being planned for the US these days, which is IMO a very good decision.

Rage Incarnate said:
But more pertinent to France, didn't several plants have to shut down in '03 during the heat wave due to lack of water? Remember that water is a recource readily needed by power plants. It is also about to become a limited resource as freshwater sources are running out because the rain water that would replenish them can't trickle down because of paved highways or becausethe water is being consumed too quickly.

Some plants were shut down as a measure of prevention for the environment, and that's because there are very strict rules concerning the temperature of the water the plants can expulse (I'm sure that wouldn't be a concern for any American-based company, don't worry). Since then a law was passed authorizing plants to expulse water 1 to 2°C hotter than usual in exceptional cases like what happened in 2003. And concerning water as a resource, all plants use it for cooling. It's a problem for thermal plants in general, so I don't really see your point here in regard to nuclear plants specifically. Even hydroelectric dams suffer from the lack of water in summer. Power plants also don't "consume" water, they just take cool water and expulse hotter one. The problem with this is that it decreases the amount available for people at the same moment (hypothetically) and can harm the river's ecosystem if it's too hot. All that leaves us is solar and wind-based power plants, and these just can't handle the demand.

Rage Incarnate said:
Nuclear is not a sustainable option. I understand why so many people say that green alternatives don't work, there isn't enough power generated by them to support the needs of many major cities, but this is an ofshoot of a larger problem. ie. Limited resources. The world isn't spending it's limited resources wisely and there is going to be a major change in lifestyle and economics once the fuel shortage really hits.

What you need to consider is: what is the best solution available? Not a perfect and fanciful solution that has no disadvantage, just the best we can use right now? Taking the state of the world into account, it's currently nuclear plants. Keep also in mind that the more we build, the more efficient they'll be. Modern ones are already way better than the first models in all respects, and it'll surely continue as the technology is developed and refined. Less wastes, better recycling of the wastes, more energy produced, less heat generated, better security, etc. Until we get cold fusion or another providential way to produce electricity that's really the only thing to do, because just waiting for a miracle isn't going to work.
 
S

smoke

Guest
I'd say just throw all the nuclear waste into the sun or something. Made sense when I was eight, and still makes sense to this day.

Burning garbage for fuel sounds pretty nifty. I'm sure it's an environmental hazard or something, but who gives a fucking shit? :troll:
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
smoke said:
I'd say just throw all the nuclear waste into the sun or something. Made sense when I was eight, and still makes sense to this day.

I didn't dare say it. Then there's the moon base mission. Since they're already going there's no harm in bringing a couple 500 tons containers with them to store in the attic. :troll:

smoke said:
Burning garbage for fuel sounds pretty nifty. I'm sure it's an environmental hazard or something, but who gives a fucking shit?

Apparently they're not burning it, they're using the gases created during the decomposition of the garbage as fuel.
 

Scorpio

Courtesy of Grail's doodling.
I didnt realize that garbage dumps produced enough methane to provide that much energy, and that it was a reliable and consistant source. I should look into this further, as thats pretty interesting
 

Scorpio

Courtesy of Grail's doodling.
Well, Ego's more of a planet, not a moon. If anything, he would be responsible for this http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v39/FighterboyZ/moon.jpg

And unless hes willing to mutate up some freaky naked tree people, we'd be doomed.
 
Top Bottom