BF2S Forums The Nuclear Option

original article you posted wrote:

The nearly 50-year old design was invented by Dr. Otis “Pete” Peterson at the United States’ famed Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico and has proved safe for students to use. Often referred to as a “nuclear battery,” the Hyperion HyperDrive is self-regulating with no mechanical parts to break down or otherwise fail. Sealed at the factory, the module is not opened until it has been returned to the factory to be refueled, approximately every five years or so, depending on use. This containment, along with the strategy of completely burying the module at the operating site, protects against the possibility of human incompetence, or hostile tampering and proliferation.

Lots of other interesting things coming up with this new info.

same article wrote:

Hyperion Power Generation, a New Mexico company, is planning to mass market within 5 years a small, modular, non-weapons grade nuclear power reactor named the Hyperion Hyperdrive – in other words, your own personal nuclear power plant!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_Power_Generation wrote:

Fuel: uranium metal enriched to ~5% U-235, civil grade, solid phase, granular; thorium metal granules can be used as well. Essentially, enriched uranium metal that has absorbed a large amount of hydrogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-235 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-235]The fissile uranium in nuclear weapons usually contains 85% or more of 235U known as weapon(s)-grade, though for a crude, inefficient weapon 20% is sufficient (called weapon(s)-usable); even less is sufficient, but then the critical mass required rapidly increases. However, judicious use of implosion and neutron reflectors can enable construction of a weapon from a quantity of uranium below the usual critical mass for its level of enrichment, though this would likely only be possible in a country which already had extensive experience in developing nuclear weapons.

1) original source is shit

2) obvious security problem

The shear risk of operating a nuclear power station in addition to the waste problem is outweighed by beautiful more environmentally friendly hydroelectric power stations. <3 Norway

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

The shear risk of operating a nuclear power station in addition to the waste problem is outweighed by beautiful more environmentally friendly hydroelectric power stations. <3 Norway

I have been on an Nuclear power plant and they are not as dirty as people think. This was in Sweden and I was at Ringhals several years ago.

All that power plant did was make the water outside the pipes a bit warmer than usual and some new species stayed at just that place.

Otherwise it was nothing much in pollution from the plant itself.

Having a meltdown would mean nothing since it's so protective and it had like 1-2 meter thick concrete walls on the outer side.


But yea the reason countries don't want to use it is.

1: Still afraid that it will have a meltdown like Chernobyl
2: The radio active waste takes quite a long time to become neutral again.
3: Still think it's dirty to the pollution.
4: Still live in the past.

You could actually live next to a nuclear power plant for 50 years and during this time. Drinking coka cola would be much harder on your health than that power plant. You'd have a bigger risk of dieing from a car crash. You'd died of age before the plant did anything to you.

We come a long way with protection on that nuclear waste. But it's like this 1 Nuclear power plant = Supply like 70% ish of Sweden power usage. Just one.

Since we have no earthquakes it's fine to.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Lots of other interesting things coming up with this new info.

So rather than spending the effort in looking at I was talking about you just make the wrong assumption.. twice. You're so full of yourself. You are clearly wrong. Not that you'd ever admit it.

I will look at the information presented to me, by the manufacturer to make my analysis. Since they don't feel the need to post any of their technology on their website for people to look into, I'm going to assume the blogger at least got the very basics of the technology correct. A poor assumption as it turns out.

Regardless, my skepticism was correct. It has many of the same problems as traditional nuclear power plants, including security issues and the not in my backyard problem.

Condescending to the pricks who don't put any useful info on their site, not to you.

People that make sites for "miracle tech" and don't explain anything suck. They make for lots of mis or uninformed chatter on the internats (such as that blog) and never deliver.

Also, you never would have gotten close. My reflexes are far superior.

Relatively irrelevant. I am posting my thoughts on what you posted...you can post your thoughts on what you posted after you look into it.

usmarine wrote:

mod fight lulz

I make you laugh, I'm here to fuckin' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?

2nd amendment y'all

oh wait the constitution only applies to us... shit that sucks so much for spreading freedom

Last edited by Spearhead (2009-02-14 08:47:38)

Kmarion wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

2nd amendment y'all

oh wait the constitution only applies to us... shit that sucks so much for spreading freedom

Spearhead, my fellow Tampon Tampainian, I must admit.. this post has me confused.

Tampa Bay(ian) sounds a little less.... idk, disgusting

And yes my post confused me as well.  I guess I was trying to say that if were we to allow a country like, say, Iraq, the 2nd amendment without strings attached, the place would be fucked. 

Wouldn't the right to bear arms = right own a nuclear warhead, in the most extreme case?

JahManRed wrote:

usmarine wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

So, why don't more countries invest in nuke power.

chernobyl, 3 mile island, hippies, green peace retards, etc

Green peace retards who don't want to see thousands or millions more kids like this:
http://baldiness.com/wp-content/uploads … rnobyl.jpg

Nuke plants haven't been bad for Canada.  France's record is pretty good too.