Hey guys,
Once again, I would like to talk about one of the controversial topics that plague our nation today. Immigration, both legal and illegal.
I would like to throw out a couple points about my beliefs before I delve further. I am a huge proponent of legal immigration. This means that you have been vetted by our government and are shown to be an asset to our nation. You can speak our language and wont be a hindrance to the citizens already here, natural born or not.
Immigration is what makes America great. The different backgrounds bring different ideas into the mix. It gives different perspectives, ways to look at the same problems in many lights.
On that note, there is a reason that we have immigration laws. One would be national security. We, as a nation, do not want terrorists, I do not care where they come from, to be allowed to enter our country.
We also screen people and make them take a citizen test to ensure that they know the history of our great nation. The reason people leave other countries to come here is because the US has a generally better outlook on life. More opportunities and better education than alot of other places in the world. The worst thing that can happen is for people to come to the US, and then try and make it into the place from which they came. There is a reason that they left, and if they pass the test, they have shown that they understand this.
A second reason is so that we do not inhibit the citizens that are already here. If we had an influx of uneducated, unskilled workers into the US, they would be a burden on the tax payers because the tax payers would end up taking care of them in the form of welfare. If we had open borders, everyone would want to come here. The US is one of the last nations in the world to be truly free.
I do not understand how anyone can be for completely open borders. Should we not make sure we know who is in the country?
Recently, I have heard a lot of liberals praise Sweden for their Democratic Socialism. This system does not work with open borders, as they found out. If a person could come over and just get free welfare, everyone would do it. And they did. Sweden has a problem with non-native born people having higher unemployment rates, use of welfare, higher crime rates, etc.
I do think the way they treat citizenship is interesting. There is no law that states if you are born in Sweden, you are a citizen. One or both of your parents have to be a citizen already.
They do offer citizenship after a five year stint of living there. I believe that is completely fair. Also, if you are convicted of a felony before your five years are up, you are no longer eligible for citizenship.
I think this is a great policy. I do believe a language test is the best route for the US though. The US is a big country. There may be little pockets with certain ethnic groups dominating the area, but for the most part English is the dominant language and will need to be known to get a decent job. I know that their are outliers to this statement.
I know I will get some heat for saying that the fourteenth amendment is not in the best interest of the US and her citizens. If we did not have a welfare state, like back when the country was founded, this amendment would be perfectly fine. That being said, most of the people who are against this amendment changing, are liberal and say that this is discrimination.
.
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/sweden-restrictive-immigration-policy-and-multiculturalism
Hope this was interesting! I look forward to hearing everyones opinions!
The Nuke Cow
Wednesday, March 30, 2016
Friday, March 25, 2016
Global Warming
Hey guys,
Today I am going to talk about a very controversial topic, global warming. I am currently watching cowspiracy. I honestly cant say I have watched a more dumb and uninformed show. They dont provide any actual research. Just information on how they feel the environment is being destroyed. Since there is no research shown, I dont know where they are getting their information.
The first couple episodes basically say, yes the transportation and energy industries are destroying the world. But the one area that isnt being talked about is the food industry. And they have said the food industry is more of a concern than the other two. They are calling for the end of farming animals for food..........
This is the dumbest idea ever. And it will never happen. What these people fail to understand is that we feed the world, the first world countries anyway. The only way we can do this is through selective breeding and mega farming. The worlds population has not stopped growing and wont anytime soon.
Unless we want to start committing genocide in the form of starvation, farming wont stop. I have worked on a farm for about 8 years. I can first hand tell you that the EPA is up our ass all times of the day. They monitor all waste from the cows, they mandate that it all has to be captured in a retention pond. They monitor wells, in a 5 mile radius, for elevated levels of nitrates. We get in trouble if these things get out of control.
The cows are also monitored by the government. I am not entirely sure who does this though. I know that a couple times a year a guy would come by and walk the barns to give cows a body score. This body score just shows that the cows are well taken care of, they are being properly fed, no warts are present, they arent diseased. A farm will be shutdown if they do not follow the regulations.
I have since stopped watching the show. I cant take the ignorance.
Last thing, They are talking about deforestation. I am not sure if they are talking about in the US, but any trees that are cut down for industrial use have to be replanted. Ignorance.
Hope this was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
Today I am going to talk about a very controversial topic, global warming. I am currently watching cowspiracy. I honestly cant say I have watched a more dumb and uninformed show. They dont provide any actual research. Just information on how they feel the environment is being destroyed. Since there is no research shown, I dont know where they are getting their information.
The first couple episodes basically say, yes the transportation and energy industries are destroying the world. But the one area that isnt being talked about is the food industry. And they have said the food industry is more of a concern than the other two. They are calling for the end of farming animals for food..........
This is the dumbest idea ever. And it will never happen. What these people fail to understand is that we feed the world, the first world countries anyway. The only way we can do this is through selective breeding and mega farming. The worlds population has not stopped growing and wont anytime soon.
Unless we want to start committing genocide in the form of starvation, farming wont stop. I have worked on a farm for about 8 years. I can first hand tell you that the EPA is up our ass all times of the day. They monitor all waste from the cows, they mandate that it all has to be captured in a retention pond. They monitor wells, in a 5 mile radius, for elevated levels of nitrates. We get in trouble if these things get out of control.
The cows are also monitored by the government. I am not entirely sure who does this though. I know that a couple times a year a guy would come by and walk the barns to give cows a body score. This body score just shows that the cows are well taken care of, they are being properly fed, no warts are present, they arent diseased. A farm will be shutdown if they do not follow the regulations.
I have since stopped watching the show. I cant take the ignorance.
Last thing, They are talking about deforestation. I am not sure if they are talking about in the US, but any trees that are cut down for industrial use have to be replanted. Ignorance.
Hope this was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Dirty Politics
Hey guys,
In earlier posts I have talked about dirty politics. This will be a continuation post.
In the primaries right now, there are two viable candidates for both the Republican and Democrat parties. Many people are trying to prove one candidate is better than the other. This is how politics is designed to work.
In the republican priamary, There are three candidates left: Trump, Cruz, and Kasich. But there are only two viable candidates. With the number of delegates left, Kasich is mathematically eliminated. He cannot garner enough votes to get the nomination. So there are two possible reasons why he is staying in. Either he has been promised VP by trump, Kasich will steal votes from Cruz, or he is hoping to steal the election in a contested convention.
I am not entirely sure how a contested convention works. I have researched it but still dont quite understand it. The main thing that I have seen is that the RNC can just up and change the rules of the convention. Therefore they can set it up to pick the candidate that the establishment wants.
This is similar underhandness of the democrat party with their super delegate scheme.
Something in politics has to change. And whether you agree with it or not, Sander and Trump are making waves within the Democrat and Republican party respectively.
Hope this was interesting!
Then Nuke Cow
In earlier posts I have talked about dirty politics. This will be a continuation post.
In the primaries right now, there are two viable candidates for both the Republican and Democrat parties. Many people are trying to prove one candidate is better than the other. This is how politics is designed to work.
In the republican priamary, There are three candidates left: Trump, Cruz, and Kasich. But there are only two viable candidates. With the number of delegates left, Kasich is mathematically eliminated. He cannot garner enough votes to get the nomination. So there are two possible reasons why he is staying in. Either he has been promised VP by trump, Kasich will steal votes from Cruz, or he is hoping to steal the election in a contested convention.
I am not entirely sure how a contested convention works. I have researched it but still dont quite understand it. The main thing that I have seen is that the RNC can just up and change the rules of the convention. Therefore they can set it up to pick the candidate that the establishment wants.
This is similar underhandness of the democrat party with their super delegate scheme.
Something in politics has to change. And whether you agree with it or not, Sander and Trump are making waves within the Democrat and Republican party respectively.
Hope this was interesting!
Then Nuke Cow
Sunday, March 20, 2016
The people that regulate the US nuclear industry
Hey guys,
Do you actually know the people that govern a good bit of your energy laws? Until I took my systems class, I had no idea. So I am going to bring them into the light for you to see. I have compiled a small background story on each member and here they are:
Do you actually know the people that govern a good bit of your energy laws? Until I took my systems class, I had no idea. So I am going to bring them into the light for you to see. I have compiled a small background story on each member and here they are:
DOE Secretary Ernest Moniz:
Ernest Moniz was born in 1944.
Graduated Summa Cum Laude with a bachelor of sciences in Physics from Boston
College, then went to Stanford University, obtaining his PhD in Theoretical
Physics in 1972. A year later he became a faculty member for MIT, and has
remained one since. His research Focus has been “Energy technology and policy, including a
leadership role in MIT interdisciplinary technology and policy studies on the
future of nuclear power, coal, nuclear fuel cycles, natural gas, and solar
energy in a low-carbon world.” Secretary Muniz has served as Under Secretary of
the Department of Energy under President Clinton, where he led a comprehensive
review of nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship, and served as the Secretary’s
special negotiator for Russian nuclear materials disposition programs.
Comparing Secretary Muniz to his predecessor Dr. Chu, both
are very distinguished individuals. Dr. Chu was co-recipient of the noble
prize. There is slight deviation in research interests with Secretary Muniz
more slanted towards nuclear power as his choice for alternative energy and Dr.
Chu’s research shows that he is more interested in Bio Fuels and Solar
technology.
Sources:
https://esd.mit.edu/Faculty_Pages/moniz/moniz.htm, http://energy.gov/contributors/dr-steven-chu, http://energy.gov/contributors/dr-ernest-moniz
Chairman Stephen G.
Burns
Chairman Stephen Burns graduated from Colgate College with a
bachelor’s degree in 1975. He then went on to obtain a Law Degree from George
Washington University in 1978. He has spent most of his career working for the
NRC, 33 years, starting out as an attorney for the Regional Operations and
Enforcement division. He has received rewards for his service, including the Presidential
Meritorious Executive Rank Award, and Distinguished Service Award. Chairman Burn’s
term will be up in 2019
Commissioner Kristine
L. Svinicki
In 1988 Ms. Svinicki graduated from the University of
Michigan with a bachelor’s degree in Nuclear Engineering. She has previously
worked for the offices of Nuclear Energy and the Civilian Radioactive waste
management in the Department of Energy. She has also worked for the senate
armed services committee under Sen. John Warner and Sen. John McCain. There she
was “responsible for the committee’s portfolio of defense science and
technology programs and policies as well as the atomic energy defense
activities of the U.S. DOE.” Commissioner Svinicki’s term will be up in 2017.
Commissioner William
C. Ostendorff
Commissioner Ostendorff attended the Naval Academy and
graduated with a degree in Systems Engineering. He has also earned law degrees
from Georgetown University and the University of Texas. He served in the United
States Navy for 26 years, commanding an attack submarine and a squadron of
attack submarines throughout that time. He has also served on the House Armed
Services Committee as a staff member. He was “staff director for the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee with oversight responsibilities for the Department of
Energy’s atomic energy defense activities as well as the Department of
Defense’s space, missile defense and intelligence programs.” Commissioner
Ostendorffs term will be up in 2016.
Commissioner Jeff
Baran
Mr. Baran attended Ohio University and received a bachelor’s
and master’s degree in political science. He also attended Harvard Law School
and has a law degree. He has worked for the United States House of Representatives
filling many positions such as: counsel to the House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, staff director of Energy and Environment, and was a member of
Energy and Commerce Committee. Mr. Baran has helped out with a multitude of
issues including, reactor licensing and uranium mining, milling, and
enrichment. His term will be up in 2018.
I know, long and boring. But it is important to know that people that are regulating you!
The Nuke Cow
Carbon Credits
Hey guys,
Something that always intrigued me were carbon credits. The main thing that intrigued me was that they cant be used for nuclear power plants. So here is a little information on them.
Something that always intrigued me were carbon credits. The main thing that intrigued me was that they cant be used for nuclear power plants. So here is a little information on them.
1 Carbon credits are basically a license given to
countries that have signed the Kyoto Protocol. Each country that has signed it
is given only a certain amount of credits that limit the amount of carbon they
can produce. If a country produces less carbon than they have credits, the
credits can then be traded to another country that may have produced more
carbon than they have credits.
The United States nuclear power industry is
not directly affected by the Kyoto Protocol because the U.S. is not a signatory
of it. We do not have Cap and Trade laws. That being said, part of the Kyoto
Protocol was that carbon credits are not able to be used to fund the
construction of new Nuclear Power Plants. This means other countries cannot use
their leftover credits to produce nuclear power.
This also means that companies that could
build nuclear power plants will be hesitant to build new plants because the
U.S. might someday sign the agreement. If this happens, the companies will be
able to sell the leftover credits they may have to fund renewable sources of
energy, such as wind and solar.
http://www.nirs.org/climate/cop6/bonnnukelanguagefinal.htm
Hope this was a little interesting!
The Nuke Cow
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Why I dont pay for television
Hey guys,
When I get asked by my friends if I have seen a particular commercial and I say no, I get blank stares. They tell me, "but its plastered everywhere". Well, you cannot see what is not on your TV. I refuse to pay for cable/satellite tv. Heres the reasons why:
1) The internet is a glorious thing. A subscription to netflix, hulu, and amazon prime together is still cheaper than most satellite TV (dish network/directv).
2) TV has turned from entertainment. The amount of commercials, in my opinion, is ridiculous. I paid to watch and be entertained. I did not pay for a sales man to be throwing some junk he wants me to buy in my face.
3) The media. The media on these platforms is incredibly biased. With the exception of Fox News, they lean left of center. Fox News leans right of center. But that is a margin that is ridiculous. CNN, ABC, MCNBC. Thats just the three off the top of my head.
4) The Internet is a glorious thing! I can go to any website I want and research the topics that matter to me. I can go and see the biases from each side. Meaning that I can go to a left wing blogger and read their ideas, then go to a right wing blogger and read his.
5) These cable/satellite companies do not offer "good deals" even though it may sound like it. I looked into getting both Directv and Dish. They want you to sign a contract. They charge you for use of the receiver. They charge you a monthly bill. Sometimes they charge for setup, that is if you dont upgrade to the package they actually want you to buy (the expensive one). It was the same for the cable company. Charge for setup. I didnt get far enough into the process to see if there was a contract though.
Thats my two cents on television companies. They are in it to line their pockets. And the great thing about capitalism is that I dont have to be a part of it if the items they are selling do not interest me
Hope this was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
When I get asked by my friends if I have seen a particular commercial and I say no, I get blank stares. They tell me, "but its plastered everywhere". Well, you cannot see what is not on your TV. I refuse to pay for cable/satellite tv. Heres the reasons why:
1) The internet is a glorious thing. A subscription to netflix, hulu, and amazon prime together is still cheaper than most satellite TV (dish network/directv).
2) TV has turned from entertainment. The amount of commercials, in my opinion, is ridiculous. I paid to watch and be entertained. I did not pay for a sales man to be throwing some junk he wants me to buy in my face.
3) The media. The media on these platforms is incredibly biased. With the exception of Fox News, they lean left of center. Fox News leans right of center. But that is a margin that is ridiculous. CNN, ABC, MCNBC. Thats just the three off the top of my head.
4) The Internet is a glorious thing! I can go to any website I want and research the topics that matter to me. I can go and see the biases from each side. Meaning that I can go to a left wing blogger and read their ideas, then go to a right wing blogger and read his.
5) These cable/satellite companies do not offer "good deals" even though it may sound like it. I looked into getting both Directv and Dish. They want you to sign a contract. They charge you for use of the receiver. They charge you a monthly bill. Sometimes they charge for setup, that is if you dont upgrade to the package they actually want you to buy (the expensive one). It was the same for the cable company. Charge for setup. I didnt get far enough into the process to see if there was a contract though.
Thats my two cents on television companies. They are in it to line their pockets. And the great thing about capitalism is that I dont have to be a part of it if the items they are selling do not interest me
Hope this was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
Monday, March 14, 2016
What to do with garbage?
Hey guys,
I told a slight fib in my last post. The post after this will once again be political.
For this post I want to address a problem that I have really never understood, what should we do with our garbage.
On older movies based out of NY or some northern populated state, I would always see a barge full of garbage going out of the port and I never could figure out where it was going. I just did some research and still could not find a definitive answer of whether it was being dumped into the ocean or if there was a landfill outside the city where it was being taken.
Either way, dumping in the ocean would be terrible and landfills are not much better. The garbage just sits there, doing nothing for us, taking up a ton of space.
SO, how do we address this problem? Efforts to recycle have been underway for a long time and have come a long way. The trash is sorted, removing plastics, metals, and any other items that may be recycled.
Now that its sorted, what do we do with the left overs? Throw it into a landfill for it to sit there and grow?
Well, I recently toured a garbage burning plant. It was pretty neat. They sort the garbage before and after they burn it, removing anything that is recyclable. The heat produced is used to boil water and make electricity. The volume of material is reduced by up to 90%.
According the website below, the waste to energy plants have a smaller carbon footprint than landfills as well. There are pollution control systems, very similiar to the ones employed in coal power plants, to remove the harmful agents such as mercury and fly ash from the flue gas.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electricity-make-sense-1447643515.
This is just food for thought. I found it pretty cool that we can turn our waste into something actually useful, instead of letting it decay in a land fill.
http://www.pinellascounty.org/solidwaste/wte.htm
Hope that was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
I told a slight fib in my last post. The post after this will once again be political.
For this post I want to address a problem that I have really never understood, what should we do with our garbage.
On older movies based out of NY or some northern populated state, I would always see a barge full of garbage going out of the port and I never could figure out where it was going. I just did some research and still could not find a definitive answer of whether it was being dumped into the ocean or if there was a landfill outside the city where it was being taken.
Either way, dumping in the ocean would be terrible and landfills are not much better. The garbage just sits there, doing nothing for us, taking up a ton of space.
SO, how do we address this problem? Efforts to recycle have been underway for a long time and have come a long way. The trash is sorted, removing plastics, metals, and any other items that may be recycled.
Now that its sorted, what do we do with the left overs? Throw it into a landfill for it to sit there and grow?
Well, I recently toured a garbage burning plant. It was pretty neat. They sort the garbage before and after they burn it, removing anything that is recyclable. The heat produced is used to boil water and make electricity. The volume of material is reduced by up to 90%.
According the website below, the waste to energy plants have a smaller carbon footprint than landfills as well. There are pollution control systems, very similiar to the ones employed in coal power plants, to remove the harmful agents such as mercury and fly ash from the flue gas.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electricity-make-sense-1447643515.
This is just food for thought. I found it pretty cool that we can turn our waste into something actually useful, instead of letting it decay in a land fill.
http://www.pinellascounty.org/solidwaste/wte.htm
Hope that was interesting!
The Nuke Cow
Friday, March 11, 2016
Super Delegates
Hey guys,
I am going to return to the political environment and address the topic of super delegates. This has a bunch of Bernie supporters all riled up because the numbers for delegates being reported also include the super delegate pledges. This makes it seem that the election is basically over and Hillary will win. My personal thought is that Bernie never had a chance. The Clintons are crooked and will steal the election at all costs. They learned their lesson with Obamas victory over Hillary in 2008. But I have been wrong before. Only time will tell.
Anyway, super delegates are unpledged Democrat party leaders: senators, past presidents, etc. These people can swing an election one way or another. There are 712 of these delegates. There are 4763 total delegates. So the super delegates only make up a fraction of the total. In order to win, one of the runners has to obtain 2382 total delegates.
So Bernie supporters do have a little to be mad about. But the media has always been slanted towards the Clintons.
I believe that I am probably the least biased person in this regard because I am on the other side of the spectrum.
I say this because I would like to point out something. The rules put in place by the DNC are unfair. Why should past party leaders have a bigger say than the constituents that elected them? That is absolutely ludicrous and opens up a can of worms that can lead to an oligarchy: Rule by an elite class. I personally believe that the end goal of the Clintons is to have this oligarchy. Why would they support these slanted rules if that wasnt the end goal?
Because of this, I encourage all voters, Democrat and Republican, to look into their candidates, ALL OF THEM, before they vote. Look into what they supported in the past. Look at their voting record. These two things will tell you almost everything you need know about where they stand on issues. Their babble in the debates and commercials are nothing but spectacles. Actions speak louder than words.
I do this very thing before every election. I scan the field and make a list of the candidates, then research their past before I watch anything that they say or that news reports about them.
The reason that I posted this is because I see a lot of my fellow students outraged at the unfair support for Clinton. If you want things to change, you have to stay informed and vote the crooked people out.
This very thing is happening to the Republican party as we speak. The constituents are tired of electing these establishment candidates that make promises, Rubio on immigration, then turning their back and doing the exact opposite.
The next post will be on corruption in the Republican party
One last note. I notice that a lot of people I talk to do not explore the other side. I believe it to be very important to know the stance of both sides. You actually might find yourself in agreement with some of the other sides arguments. Voting by party is not the way to move America in the correct direction.
Just to give you an example, I agree with the idea that everyone should have the opportunity to go to college. But taking money from someone else, big company or small guy, and giving it to someone else is not the way to do it. Its morally wrong in my opinion.
I would suggest federal loans, interest free, that have to be paid back once you graduate. And there would need to be penalties for dropping/failing out to keep people from abusing the system.
I hope this was informative and gives you the urge to go out and explore all the potential candidates.
The Nuke Cow
I am going to return to the political environment and address the topic of super delegates. This has a bunch of Bernie supporters all riled up because the numbers for delegates being reported also include the super delegate pledges. This makes it seem that the election is basically over and Hillary will win. My personal thought is that Bernie never had a chance. The Clintons are crooked and will steal the election at all costs. They learned their lesson with Obamas victory over Hillary in 2008. But I have been wrong before. Only time will tell.
Anyway, super delegates are unpledged Democrat party leaders: senators, past presidents, etc. These people can swing an election one way or another. There are 712 of these delegates. There are 4763 total delegates. So the super delegates only make up a fraction of the total. In order to win, one of the runners has to obtain 2382 total delegates.
So Bernie supporters do have a little to be mad about. But the media has always been slanted towards the Clintons.
I believe that I am probably the least biased person in this regard because I am on the other side of the spectrum.
I say this because I would like to point out something. The rules put in place by the DNC are unfair. Why should past party leaders have a bigger say than the constituents that elected them? That is absolutely ludicrous and opens up a can of worms that can lead to an oligarchy: Rule by an elite class. I personally believe that the end goal of the Clintons is to have this oligarchy. Why would they support these slanted rules if that wasnt the end goal?
Because of this, I encourage all voters, Democrat and Republican, to look into their candidates, ALL OF THEM, before they vote. Look into what they supported in the past. Look at their voting record. These two things will tell you almost everything you need know about where they stand on issues. Their babble in the debates and commercials are nothing but spectacles. Actions speak louder than words.
I do this very thing before every election. I scan the field and make a list of the candidates, then research their past before I watch anything that they say or that news reports about them.
The reason that I posted this is because I see a lot of my fellow students outraged at the unfair support for Clinton. If you want things to change, you have to stay informed and vote the crooked people out.
This very thing is happening to the Republican party as we speak. The constituents are tired of electing these establishment candidates that make promises, Rubio on immigration, then turning their back and doing the exact opposite.
The next post will be on corruption in the Republican party
One last note. I notice that a lot of people I talk to do not explore the other side. I believe it to be very important to know the stance of both sides. You actually might find yourself in agreement with some of the other sides arguments. Voting by party is not the way to move America in the correct direction.
Just to give you an example, I agree with the idea that everyone should have the opportunity to go to college. But taking money from someone else, big company or small guy, and giving it to someone else is not the way to do it. Its morally wrong in my opinion.
I would suggest federal loans, interest free, that have to be paid back once you graduate. And there would need to be penalties for dropping/failing out to keep people from abusing the system.
I hope this was informative and gives you the urge to go out and explore all the potential candidates.
The Nuke Cow
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Nuclear or some other thing
Hi guys,
Apparently Nuclear or not is a title of a book. That was going to be the title of this post, but I googled it and its a book. Nothing is original anymore.
Anyway, I would like to talk about whether or nuclear power actually has a place in the market today. I believe yes. There are many reasons for this which I will delve into in just a minute.
There are many ways of making energy. We have coal, natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind and wind power plants. Im sure I am leaving out some other smaller ones, but for the purpose of this blog, those are pretty irrelevant.
Everyone in todays culture, natural gas and coal are shunned and said to be terrible for the environment. While they may not be great for the environment, every single one of the possibilities for making power has negative affects.
Coal produces carbon dioxide, ammonia, sulfure dioxide, and many other gases. The coal industry does remove a lot of the harmful chemicals that are produced through: dry sorbent injection, low-NOx burners, dry/wet scrubbers, and many other techniques. These processes help the coal plants meet the EPA standards. You can read up on these if you wish at this website: http://www.americaspower.org/clean-coal-technologies-1663/
Natural gas plants burn more efficiently and cleaner than their counterpart coal plants. The main argument I have seen from this is that drilling for natural gas is bad for the environment. On this standard, everything humans have ever made is bad for the environment. The flue gas from these plants are also treated in a similiar manner to the coal plants. These plants can be ramped up or down depending upon the load placed on the grid. These plants are very compact
Nuclear plants run on uranium that is also mined. It produces a bit of waste that can be contained on site for many years. No accidents in the US has irradiated the public to the point of harm. The nuclear plants have a difficult time ramping up or down and are generally used as base loads for the grid, reserving the natural gas plants to ramp up a peak times during the year.
Solar plants are massive. They take up a ton of real estate to produce even a fraction of the power compared to any of the three plants listed above. There are also many hazardous materials used in the making of silicone solar panels. Silicon tetrachloride, sulfur hexaflouride, and sulfur dioxide are just some of the nasty chemicals produced. Scrubbers just like in the coal plants have to be used to clean some of the processes used to make the panels. They are also only reliable during the day, when it is not cloudy. You can read more about it here. http://solarindustrymag.com/online/issues/SI1309/FEAT_05_Hazardous_Materials_Used_In_Silicon_PV_Cell_Production_A_Primer.html
Wind turbines are similar to solar panels. They take up a lot of real estate in order to compete with the other three types of power plants. They also pose an environmental concern in the form of killing a lot of birds. They are also not completely reliable due to the wind not being on all the time. Other than that, they would be great!
With all this in mind, coal will eventually be phased out because of environmental extremists. Natural gas will most likely succumb to the same fate, but many years later. This leaves wind, solar, and nuclear. Out of these three, two are not reliable during all times of the day. So for the near future, I would say that nuclear is the best bet for energy. In the distant future when solar panels are much more efficient and there are ways to store the energy, it would be a great addition to the fleet. At that point, there will still be a need for base load power.
Take it for what you will. Please do some research of your own and come back with responses!!
I look forward to hearing from all of you
The Nuke Cow
Apparently Nuclear or not is a title of a book. That was going to be the title of this post, but I googled it and its a book. Nothing is original anymore.
Anyway, I would like to talk about whether or nuclear power actually has a place in the market today. I believe yes. There are many reasons for this which I will delve into in just a minute.
There are many ways of making energy. We have coal, natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind and wind power plants. Im sure I am leaving out some other smaller ones, but for the purpose of this blog, those are pretty irrelevant.
Everyone in todays culture, natural gas and coal are shunned and said to be terrible for the environment. While they may not be great for the environment, every single one of the possibilities for making power has negative affects.
Coal produces carbon dioxide, ammonia, sulfure dioxide, and many other gases. The coal industry does remove a lot of the harmful chemicals that are produced through: dry sorbent injection, low-NOx burners, dry/wet scrubbers, and many other techniques. These processes help the coal plants meet the EPA standards. You can read up on these if you wish at this website: http://www.americaspower.org/clean-coal-technologies-1663/
Natural gas plants burn more efficiently and cleaner than their counterpart coal plants. The main argument I have seen from this is that drilling for natural gas is bad for the environment. On this standard, everything humans have ever made is bad for the environment. The flue gas from these plants are also treated in a similiar manner to the coal plants. These plants can be ramped up or down depending upon the load placed on the grid. These plants are very compact
Nuclear plants run on uranium that is also mined. It produces a bit of waste that can be contained on site for many years. No accidents in the US has irradiated the public to the point of harm. The nuclear plants have a difficult time ramping up or down and are generally used as base loads for the grid, reserving the natural gas plants to ramp up a peak times during the year.
Solar plants are massive. They take up a ton of real estate to produce even a fraction of the power compared to any of the three plants listed above. There are also many hazardous materials used in the making of silicone solar panels. Silicon tetrachloride, sulfur hexaflouride, and sulfur dioxide are just some of the nasty chemicals produced. Scrubbers just like in the coal plants have to be used to clean some of the processes used to make the panels. They are also only reliable during the day, when it is not cloudy. You can read more about it here. http://solarindustrymag.com/online/issues/SI1309/FEAT_05_Hazardous_Materials_Used_In_Silicon_PV_Cell_Production_A_Primer.html
Wind turbines are similar to solar panels. They take up a lot of real estate in order to compete with the other three types of power plants. They also pose an environmental concern in the form of killing a lot of birds. They are also not completely reliable due to the wind not being on all the time. Other than that, they would be great!
With all this in mind, coal will eventually be phased out because of environmental extremists. Natural gas will most likely succumb to the same fate, but many years later. This leaves wind, solar, and nuclear. Out of these three, two are not reliable during all times of the day. So for the near future, I would say that nuclear is the best bet for energy. In the distant future when solar panels are much more efficient and there are ways to store the energy, it would be a great addition to the fleet. At that point, there will still be a need for base load power.
Take it for what you will. Please do some research of your own and come back with responses!!
I look forward to hearing from all of you
The Nuke Cow
Monday, March 7, 2016
Environmental Pathway Modeling
Hey guys,
Today I want to address more environmental dispersion
models. There are a ton of models out there for use by every industry to
predict where emissions will go.
A website called lakes environmental offers software that
calculates the dispersion in air, tracks emissions for compliance, tracks
emergency release, and calculates the risk involved with each of these.
I recently was able to tour a garbage burning plant where my
uncle is employed as an operator. The ash and emissions from the burning are
all monitored for levels of certain toxins. This stuff goes through many
filters and gets treated with many chemicals, the list was too long for me to
remember.
In the case that something went wrong with the filtering and
treatment system, a program such as one of the ones offered by lakes
environmental would be used to see who was exposed to say excessive amounts of
mercury, one of the toxins that is filtered out.
In the nuclear industry, we would use the models to see who
was at the wrong end of some terrible irradiation or if the radiation was
actually bad enough to worry about.
For ground dispersion, there are a bunch of free software
from, http://igwmc.mines.edu/software/freeware_list.html.
These models range from large spill accidents to small discharge from or into a
well. There are way to many for me to go through all of them. These tools are
out there for industrial use and they are being used by many industries.
Hope this was somewhat interesting, I had fun looking into
this!
The Nuke Cow
Spring break
Hey guys,
Its been a little over a week since I last posted. This was due to me being on my last spring break of my undergraduate career. It was a BLAST!
Me and three buddies borrowed my parents yukon and went on a Florida road trip. We went up to Panama city beach, stopping along the way to see the no-where lands of the pan handle. It was so peaceful. The views were absolutely amazing. Panama city itself was a little disappointing. We think its because our spring break was very early compared to what it has been. But I still had fun.
We then went to Dayton Beach. The beach was awesome. Stayed with a family friend for a little while. We were supposed to go down to Miami next, but my parents got tickets to go see the globe trotters in Tampa, so we went there instead. That was a pretty good show. I found out it was kind of like professional wrestling except with basketball.
From there we went back home. I though I would sleep in and relax for a couple days. I was wrong. I had to be up at 5:30 every morning to help my dad work on the Farm. Sucked, but at least I get paid, right?
I got a surprise as SB was winding down. One of my dads buddies invited my family back to Tampa to Side Splitters comedy club to see John Caparulo. That guy had us crying the whole time!!
Well, That was my experience the last week. Panama wouldnt be my first choice for a vacation the next time I get one lol.
Hope you all had a great week!
The Nuke Cow
Its been a little over a week since I last posted. This was due to me being on my last spring break of my undergraduate career. It was a BLAST!
Me and three buddies borrowed my parents yukon and went on a Florida road trip. We went up to Panama city beach, stopping along the way to see the no-where lands of the pan handle. It was so peaceful. The views were absolutely amazing. Panama city itself was a little disappointing. We think its because our spring break was very early compared to what it has been. But I still had fun.
We then went to Dayton Beach. The beach was awesome. Stayed with a family friend for a little while. We were supposed to go down to Miami next, but my parents got tickets to go see the globe trotters in Tampa, so we went there instead. That was a pretty good show. I found out it was kind of like professional wrestling except with basketball.
From there we went back home. I though I would sleep in and relax for a couple days. I was wrong. I had to be up at 5:30 every morning to help my dad work on the Farm. Sucked, but at least I get paid, right?
I got a surprise as SB was winding down. One of my dads buddies invited my family back to Tampa to Side Splitters comedy club to see John Caparulo. That guy had us crying the whole time!!
Well, That was my experience the last week. Panama wouldnt be my first choice for a vacation the next time I get one lol.
Hope you all had a great week!
The Nuke Cow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)