Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
bigpoolog

Penn & Teller's Bull&%$@

13 posts in this topic

I figured this show might be good watching considering the whole eco-conscious movement these days.

Penn Jillette and his partner, Teller spend about half an hour debunking Hybrid cars and investigating Nuclear Power. It also has Lesbians, but unfortunately for Reg, there's no nudity. :P

Language is kind of coarse, but it's good watchin' if you have a half-hour to burn.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZD6DwfTT7I

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGUli8ljixM...ted&search=

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bCAKxp3ZdI...ted&search=

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a possum f@#ked a dustbuster. Ha.

In all seriousness, there is nothing wrong with atomic energy. Period. That's just a fact. Problem is we have weiner lame-os bringing up Chernobyl like it means anything.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This show is awesome. Damn shame the only place you can see it is Showtime... And YouTube, illegally.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This show is awesome. Damn shame the only place you can see it is Showtime... And YouTube, illegally.

They have DVD's of it. I'm considering buying them off of Amazon.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This show is awesome. Damn shame the only place you can see it is Showtime... And YouTube, illegally.

the dvd's are decently cheap... ~$20 for a season i think.

the one on global warming is damn funny...getting people to sign a petition to make water illegal

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was funny, I love how un-PC they are. Tell it like it is!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I learned a little about nuclear reactors in my time at Ontario Power Generation. I wasn't directly involved, so I'm not an expert.

However, I do know enough to know that the old Russian design that Chernobyl was built on was badly flawed, as were some of the early American designs.

Basically, they are unstable after a certain point - the coolant boils and nothing is left to cool the reactor. Cross that point and there is nothing left to do.

The CANDU (Canadian) reactor is one of the best in the world. It can extract more power from the same fuel than any other reactor design - you can even run one on spent Russian or American fuel, and the South Koreans have actually done this - taken spent Chinese nuclear waste (Russian reactor design) and used it as fuel! It also doesn't have that instability point as did the early American and Russian designs - the coolant will never boil away from the rods.

One idea that really intrigued me was from a private Chinese entrepreneur. He came up with a casing for fuel pellets that would only allow the radiation to escape if they were being bombarded. This means, basically, the fuel would work in a reactor, but as spend fuel it is almost completely inert. As a demo, he actually ran the reactor, then opened it and picked up one of the fuel balls. Plus, they are entirely scalable - since they don't need giant support buildings for cooling. The ball casing helps disperse the heat, and if the casing gets too hot it stops the reaction! Genius design. His demo reactor was about the size of a popcorn cart. If anyone knows the size of a modern nuclear plant, you know how amazing that is.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the CANDU reactor has the same positive void coefficient problem as the Russian reactors, just to a far lesser extent, so it is easy to control and is generally safe. The design characteristics that allow for the use of the spent fuel bring with them the void coefficient problem. The US doesn't allow for reactors with that problem at all, and thus does not allow the construction of CANDU reactors in the states.

That said, the CANDU reactor is still a wonderful design, because the fuel doesn't need enriched (due to heavy water), doesn't require a shutdown to refuel, plus the ability to use the spent fuel. The void coefficient drawback is a pretty minor one, and as said, easily controlled.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it sounds like you're talking about a "pebble-bed reactor", yellow dart. i read that even CO2 could be used to turn the turbines in this style of reactor. it's also natural fail safe design.

supposedly thorium reactors, if ever built (none yet), make no harmful waste, more plentiful to mine, and produce more energy in the way they decay faster.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVDs, eh? I think I know what I'm gonna ask for come Christmas time.

I like the part where they show the "worst case scenario" tests on the spent waste.

*runs around screaming* HOLY @$#%! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE! RUN! RUN!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0