Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
10 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

I admire this sort of topic.

 

On a similar theme, is that 'alien' skeleton, discovered in Mexico, just a human being?..

Yes it is. Or just an elaborate stone carving project.

  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yes it is. Or just an elaborate stone carving project.

Genuinely thought it was a wind-up, as in it was a papier mache-designed alien-lookalike.

Posted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66923930

 

Numbers of the UK's most precious animals and plants are still falling, as a countrywide nature-loss crisis continues. 

 

Loss of nature is outpacing investment and effort to tackle it, conservation organisations say. 

 

Their State of the Nature report found 16% of 10,000 mammals, plants, insects, birds and amphibians assessed were threatened.

 

And this loss of biodiversity isn't just limited to the UK, either.

  • Sad 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Yes just reading that myself. So much to clean up though that is already polluting the environment and loads still being produced. Governments around the world should be taking this more seriously putting limits on how much can be produced. There’s still so much packaging that consumers simply can’t avoid, and I’m confident that if authorities made it illegal, they’d find alternatives.

 

Recycling using enzymes may be part of the solution but the real challenge is to stop producing it in the first place, and find less damaging alternatives.

  • Like 1
Posted

One of those situations where science is solving a problem that science itself - along with the human propensity for general short-sightedness - created.

 

Not a fantastic way to go about things but considering the alternatives I think it's the least worst option.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Daggers said:

And then it will mutate to monch on concrete, steel and flesh.

We'll all have an AI driven robot buddy to tear us a new arsehole when it malfunctions before we get to that, one thing at a time

Posted
Just now, Bellend Sebastian said:

We'll all have an AI driven robot buddy to tear us a new arsehole when it malfunctions before we get to that, one thing at a time

Typical that people like you conveniently forget about aliens.

 

Why you all persist in the state-sponsored cover up eludes and sickens me.

Posted
1 minute ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

We'll all have an AI driven robot buddy to tear us a new arsehole when it malfunctions before we get to that, one thing at a time

Or a horrible fungus or virus freshly removed from permafrost that we melted.

 

Take your pick.

 

Just now, Daggers said:

Typical that people like you conveniently forget about aliens.

 

Why you all persist in the state-sponsored cover up eludes and sickens me.

We're the biggest reality TV hit in twelve different colonised systems - they'll want to keep us rolling.

Posted
38 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Typical that people like you conveniently forget about aliens.

 

Why you all persist in the state-sponsored cover up eludes and sickens me.

 

37 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Or a horrible fungus or virus freshly removed from permafrost that we melted.

 

Take your pick.

 

We're the biggest reality TV hit in twelve different colonised systems - they'll want to keep us rolling.

I notice neither of you have mentioned what's going to happen when the nano-technology in the COVID-19 vaccine is activated by the 5G signal which makes me wonder just what your agendas are???

  • Haha 2
Posted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66950930

 

Many astronomers are no longer asking whether there is life elsewhere in the Universe. 

 

The question on their minds is instead: when will we find it? 

 

Many are optimistic of detecting life signs on a faraway world within our lifetimes - possibly in the next few years.

 

All that's left is actually finding it, I reckon. Hopefully on Europa or Enceladus.

Posted

dont forget to turn off the lights when you go out.

image.png.52034d99a203ca2743c39d5aa9847a16.png

The yacht was owned by a Russian oligarch and was abandoned in Antigua in 2022 after sanctions were placed. In June 2023, the sanctions against the yacht were lifted and the boat was auctioned off. The boat is now owned by an American Oligarch. It has been burning diesel fuel for 14 years straight.

Posted
4 hours ago, ozleicester said:

dont forget to turn off the lights when you go out.

image.png.52034d99a203ca2743c39d5aa9847a16.png

The yacht was owned by a Russian oligarch and was abandoned in Antigua in 2022 after sanctions were placed. In June 2023, the sanctions against the yacht were lifted and the boat was auctioned off. The boat is now owned by an American Oligarch. It has been burning diesel fuel for 14 years straight.

Sh!tting hell

  • Sad 1
Posted

@Zear0

 

SMRs - Obviously the first generation will be more expensive, but once the design process and methodology is fixed, rapid modular roll out will enable fleets of these, at reduced costs, enhancing energy security and the drive towards net zero with less waste than a large scale reactor. Apparently. That's the big sell - what's the catch if any?

Posted
47 minutes ago, SpacedX said:

@Zear0

 

SMRs - Obviously the first generation will be more expensive, but once the design process and methodology is fixed, rapid modular roll out will enable fleets of these, at reduced costs, enhancing energy security and the drive towards net zero with less waste than a large scale reactor. Apparently. That's the big sell - what's the catch if any?

It's such a dull answer tbh. 

 

Despite what a lot of the literature says, they're not really cheaper per MW/hr compared to traditional civil plants (with caveat). As manufacturing is standardised the UPC (unit production costs) reduces, but I think it'll still be more than current plants albeit in an odd way. 

 

It, as most things in life do, boils down to financing. Picture the sales pitch for Hinckley Point C. "Hello, I'd like to borrow £33bn to build this EPR. It will take 11 years, with high programme and cost risk to complete and will then need to operate for 20 years before we've generated enough profit before you break even." You're not going to do well in the Dragons Den and just imagine the % on investment massive state investment funds would want to finance these projects (minimum 8%). 

 

For SMRs (already old hat) and micro reactors (new hat), you're dropping down in the £700-900m real where private funding enters the fray. For commercial reasons I'll be vague, but hypothetically if you were a major tech company running data centres consuming more power than a city, imagine having two of these things running giving you free power for your center, having a second for continuation of power, then selling excess to the grid. This, combined with two years of installation and commissioning opens up a significantly larger customer base. As I said, per MW is strictly more expensive, but it's like arguing for someone to install a gas turbine in their garage. Yes it's cheaper, but upfront costs mean it's easier to just buy off the grid. 

 

The size of civil plants is dictated by our capacity to manufacture nuclear grade forgings for major vessels. You get so much more power per space the larger you can make the hot bit. Bigger the better, but then the aforementioned investment issues start to add price. Look at the strike price for massive civil nuclear. They're having to guess what the energy market will be >20 years from now hence the argument SMRs are cheaper. As an aside, that is also why I get irritated at the green groups (who I do love) comparing costs of solar/wind against nuclear. Comparing today's price of green against 20 years from now price of nuclear is just daft. 

 

Re:waste, as a general rule the smaller the island the more enriched the fuel but tbh most modern nuclear fuel has the same detriments and decay properties no matter what you use. Using standardised fuel means you can reprocess in existing facilities. I keep getting told the wonders of thorium and americium fuel, but people forget the backend costs of disposing this shite. 

 

As an aside, now the world is happy with private entities operating power, there's a wonderful market of novel technologies being developed. If you've got time, have a look at the work Helion and MOLTEXFLEX are doing. Not saying either are front runners, just interesting projects. 

 

Further aside, micro reactors are fascinating. I was speaking to US defence bod who told me that half of US casualties in Afghanistan were people protecting fuel convoys. They're extremely keen for alternative power sources for remote operating bases. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Posted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66983060

 

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been awarded to a pair of scientists who developed the technology that led to the mRNA Covid vaccines.  Professors Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman will share the prize. 

 

The technology was experimental before the pandemic, but has now been given to millions of people around the world to protect them against serious Covid-19.

 

Congratulations. Long may they continue to save lives and make ridiculous conspiracy nut antivaxxers angry.

  • Like 3
Posted
10 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66983060

 

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been awarded to a pair of scientists who developed the technology that led to the mRNA Covid vaccines.  Professors Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman will share the prize. 

 

The technology was experimental before the pandemic, but has now been given to millions of people around the world to protect them against serious Covid-19.

 

Congratulations. Long may they continue to save lives and make ridiculous conspiracy nut antivaxxers angry.

Katalin Kariko's life story is remarkable. 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
Did you know that in 1884 the first production standard electric car in the world capable of being reproduced and sold to the public was revealed?
Did you know that by early 1900 1/3 of all vehicles on the road were electric?
They started to disappear rapidly around 1920 with the introduction of gasoline by Henry Ford.
Ferdinand Porsche, the founder of the eponymous sports car, produced an electric vehicle named the 'P' in 1898, before creating the world’s first hybrid offering, which was powered by both electricity and an internal combustion engine.
So whats new that all the present generation of EV fanbois are harping about when some companies could make them way back in 1884. However, gasoline fired engines killed EVs from the face of America then!
Mercedes-Benz also offered an electric model called the Mercedes Mixte, in 1906.
This car was adopted as a taxi in the cities and even became a race car in 1907.
Therefore, there's nothing so novel in EV.
 
May be an image of drill press
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...