On 16/12/2021 08:08, sweller wrote:
> Stephen Packer wrote:
>
>> And... damn it... no more camping gas!
>
> I went camping with Vic, in Wales, in August (brave choice) and was
> impressed by my Trangia on meths.
>
Nowt brave, normally. But checking back we didn't go to Wales this
August. We were there in May, June, July and Sept.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 15/12/2021 22:27, Pipl wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:13:11 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> And then there was the fact it took in waste from other nations, which
>> will be wth us for a long lpng time.
>
> That I didn't know, but sure it wasn't for reprocessing? Dunno whether

Surprisingly hard to find info on it, but you can see from
https://fissilematerials.org/library/rr05.pdf page 4,5 & 6 that we
shipped it in for reprocessing from Japan

> THORP was around then, but Britain used to reprocess fuel for other
> nations at some point. Spent fuel is actually still full of energy;
> not all of the fissile part gets burned up and the rest is mostly
> U238, which can be made into fissile mterial. Maybe they took it as
> feedstock for fast breeders as a gamble against future fuel prices.
>
> Spent fuel would also contain some plutonium, which naturally gets
> bred even in ordinary thermal reactors, though probably low-grade i.e.
> not bomb material, but still usable in a reactor.
>
Well, if you go to catchup and watch the program, the inference was that
there was a lot of shit that needed dealing with.

But hey ho, jobs and all that :-)

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 15/12/2021 22:58, Turby wrote:
> On 12/14/2021 11:47 AM, Pipl wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:56:55 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> And unless we work out what to do with our current nuclear polution, I'm
>>> not a fan of carrying on with it. Watching Simon Reeves report from
>>> Seascale recently only re-inforced my opion. The clean up is horrific.
>>
>> Bear in mind that Seascale was mostly Gen1 reactors whose primary
>> purpose was to hastily cobble together enough Plutonium for bombs, to
>> Keep Britain In The Game.
>>
>> The result, and, who knows, maybe the culture that start engendered,
>> should not apply to a modern Gen2+ reactor like Sizewell B and Hinkley
>> Point C.
>>
> AFAICS, nuclear power is ok except for earthquakes (which is more of a
> problem anywhere on the Pacific Ocean coast,) and the waste, which lasts

How easily everyone seems to forget Chenobyl.

> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site means
> exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can mitigate that.
>

Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 15/12/2021 22:35, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
> On 15/12/2021 16:09, Higgins wrote:
>> ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I went to a nuclear risk management thing at Bristol University and they
>> reckoned that exposure to London pollution caused a greater reduction in
>> average life span than being around the Fukushima fuck up.
>
> The wind turbine industry has killed and injured far more workers than
> the nuclear power industry ever has.[1]

So do cars, and many other things.

>
> But since these are counted as workplace accidents the figures somehow
> don't matter when deciding to go nuclear or not.
>
> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
> <https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/?sh=4838faf45467>
>
>

I understand those deaths are building and maintenance.
Maybe a few could occur if the blades flew off and hit people. These are
the stats that should be matched (the equiv of radiation leaking IMO, or
someone touching an exposed wire).

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 15/12/2021 22:47, Pipl wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:35:21 +0000, Bruce Horrocks
> <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/12/2021 16:09, Higgins wrote:
>>> ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I went to a nuclear risk management thing at Bristol University and they
>>> reckoned that exposure to London pollution caused a greater reduction in
>>> average life span than being around the Fukushima fuck up.
>>
>> The wind turbine industry has killed and injured far more workers than
>> the nuclear power industry ever has.[1]
>>
>> But since these are counted as workplace accidents the figures somehow
>> don't matter when deciding to go nuclear or not.
>>
>> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>
> So the figures suggest. Sometimes skewed by poor working practices and
> conditions in third-world countries and a few major accidents, like
> the dam collapse in China (150,000+ casuaties in just that one). That
> said, I suppose the big ones roughly equate to Chernobyl, Fukushima
> Daiichi and Kyshtym.
>
>

Three Mile Island?

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

YTC#1 wrote:

> > (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
> > means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
> > mitigate that.
>
> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.

The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.

--
Simon

On 16/12/2021 09:49, ogden wrote:
> Champ wrote:
>> Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>>> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>>> <https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/?sh=4838faf45467>
>> *ding*
>>
>> How many coal miners have been killed, and that's before you even
>> start on those impacted by shit air quality
>
> Uranium, of course, mines itself.
>

Like oil.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 5:30:30 PM UTC, siwilson wrote:
> On 15/12/2021 15:34, ogden wrote:
>
> > siwilson wrote:
> >> siwilson wrote:
> >>> ogden wrote:
> >>>> A 75 kWh Tesla battery holds enough energy to boil... *does sums*...
> >>>> 800 litres of water. I think we'll cope.
> >>>>
> >>>> Not much use for burning sausages on my Weber Q though.
> >>>
> >>> The newly acquired gin palace has an external connector to plug one of
> >>> those in.
> >>>
> >> <Googles> portable-ish gas bbq's aren't cheap are they?
> >
> > I got mine for what I thought was a fairly decent price a few years back. When I googled out of curiosity to see what it'd cost me to upgrade from a Q1000 to a Q2000, I realised it was a very, very decent price indeed.
> <googles> What's the difference between them?
>

Harder, better, faster, stronger...........
Weber Q1000 - Weber Q2000
Cooking area - 189 square inches - 280 square inches
Burner BTU per hour - 8,500 BTU - 12,000 BTU
Dimension - 20.5" x 27" x 23.5" - 24.3" x 51.4" x 26"
Weight 23.3 pounds 42 pounds

On 16/12/2021 10:39, YTC#1 wrote:
> On 15/12/2021 22:47, Pipl wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:35:21 +0000, Bruce Horrocks
>> <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/12/2021 16:09, Higgins wrote:
>>>> ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I went to a nuclear risk management thing at Bristol University and
>>>> they
>>>> reckoned that exposure to London pollution caused a greater
>>>> reduction in
>>>> average life span than being around the Fukushima fuck up.
>>>
>>> The wind turbine industry has killed and injured far more workers than
>>> the nuclear power industry ever has.[1]
>>>
>>> But since these are counted as workplace accidents the figures somehow
>>> don't matter when deciding to go nuclear or not.
>>>
>>> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>>
>> So the figures suggest. Sometimes skewed by poor working practices and
>> conditions in third-world countries and a few major accidents, like
>> the dam collapse in China (150,000+ casuaties in just that one). That
>> said, I suppose the big ones roughly equate to Chernobyl, Fukushima
>> Daiichi and Kyshtym.
>>
>>
>
> Three Mile Island?
>
>

Deaths?

Supposed to have been none directly AFAIK.

Anyway, you youngsters may not remember Windscale.

"Nobody knows (for sure)". Though estimated 100-240 fatal cancer cases.

--
Moto Morini 2C/375, Moto Morini 2C/350
Gilera 175 Sport, Husqvarna 401 Svartpilen
1937 Sunbeam Model 14 250 Sports
"Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in the reality"

On 16/12/2021 10:42, sweller wrote:
> YTC#1 wrote:
>
>>> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
>>> means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
>>> mitigate that.
>>
>> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.
>
> The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.
>

yeah, 'cos who is going to hijack a train?

Watched one holding up the other trains in Cumbria last year.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 16/12/2021 11:38, Pete Fisher wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 10:39, YTC#1 wrote:
>> On 15/12/2021 22:47, Pipl wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:35:21 +0000, Bruce Horrocks
>>> <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 15/12/2021 16:09, Higgins wrote:
>>>>> ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I went to a nuclear risk management thing at Bristol University and
>>>>> they
>>>>> reckoned that exposure to London pollution caused a greater
>>>>> reduction in
>>>>> average life span than being around the Fukushima fuck up.
>>>>
>>>> The wind turbine industry has killed and injured far more workers than
>>>> the nuclear power industry ever has.[1]
>>>>
>>>> But since these are counted as workplace accidents the figures somehow
>>>> don't matter when deciding to go nuclear or not.
>>>>
>>>> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>>>
>>> So the figures suggest. Sometimes skewed by poor working practices and
>>> conditions in third-world countries and a few major accidents, like
>>> the dam collapse in China (150,000+ casuaties in just that one). That
>>> said, I suppose the big ones roughly equate to Chernobyl, Fukushima
>>> Daiichi and Kyshtym.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Three Mile Island?
>>
>
> Deaths?
>
Non as far as I am aware.
> Supposed to have been none directly AFAIK.
No, but there was humungous potential.

>
> Anyway, you youngsters may not remember Windscale.
>

Correct, I wasn't born. But did know all about it from a young age. I
think we covered it in school in the early '70s.

> "Nobody knows (for sure)". Though estimated 100-240 fatal cancer cases.
>

It's Ok, they poured all the milk away.

--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/

On 15/12/2021 23:21, Mark Olson wrote:
> Pipl <pluscher@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I still think that there should be continuous brass strips along all
>> routes so that cars can simply pull power off the Grid directly. Of
>> course, the vehicle would have to track the power feeds accurately, so
>> a simple slot between the two would do nicely. Who needs all that
>> complex smart vision technology?
>>
>> Could be a minor problem on the bits of the road where the lanes
>> swerve towards each other or cross over, though.
>
> If it's good enough for Scalextric, why not the real world?
>
> https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81ypuFJhj7L._AC_SL1500_.jpg

Thank you, Mr Murray

--
Eddie eddie@deguello.org

YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 10:42, sweller wrote:
>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>
>>>> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
>>>> means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
>>>> mitigate that.
>>>
>>> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.
>>
>> The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.
>>
>
> yeah, 'cos who is going to hijack a train?
>
There’s no point if you look at the design strength of the flasks and, even
if you gained access to the contents, you’re not going to last long enough
to move them anywhere.

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:31:57 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
wrote:

>> AFAICS, nuclear power is ok except for earthquakes (which is more of a
>> problem anywhere on the Pacific Ocean coast,) and the waste, which lasts

>How easily everyone seems to forget Chenobyl.

Which killed a handful of people
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:39:48 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
wrote:

>Three Mile Island?

Tell me, how many people did that kill?

As far as mass energy production is concerned, the nuclear industry is
many orders of magnitude safer than any other industry
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

I don't know, but I been told
You never slow down, you never grow old

On 12/16/2021 11:24 AM, Higgins wrote:
> YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 16/12/2021 10:42, sweller wrote:
>>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
>>>>> means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
>>>>> mitigate that.
>>>>
>>>> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.
>>>
>>> The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.
>>>
>>
>> yeah, 'cos who is going to hijack a train?
>>
> There’s no point if you look at the design strength of the flasks and, even
> if you gained access to the contents, you’re not going to last long enough
> to move them anywhere.
>
"Suicide bomber" kinda eliminates the idea of a deterrent.

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS, ST1100 (in memoriam)

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:39:48 +0000, YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 15/12/2021 22:47, Pipl wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:35:21 +0000, Bruce Horrocks
>> <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/12/2021 16:09, Higgins wrote:
>>>> ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I went to a nuclear risk management thing at Bristol University and they
>>>> reckoned that exposure to London pollution caused a greater reduction in
>>>> average life span than being around the Fukushima fuck up.
>>>
>>> The wind turbine industry has killed and injured far more workers than
>>> the nuclear power industry ever has.[1]
>>>
>>> But since these are counted as workplace accidents the figures somehow
>>> don't matter when deciding to go nuclear or not.
>>>
>>> [1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>>
>> So the figures suggest. Sometimes skewed by poor working practices and
>> conditions in third-world countries and a few major accidents, like
>> the dam collapse in China (150,000+ casuaties in just that one). That
>> said, I suppose the big ones roughly equate to Chernobyl, Fukushima
>> Daiichi and Kyshtym.
>>
>>
>
>Three Mile Island?

I only mentioned the three highest INES ones. I think that was all the
level 6-7 ones but I haven't looked it up.

Three-Mile Island only released a small amount of radiation, and the
only real casualty (apart from the reputation of nuclear power) was
the reactor itself.

A certain valve manufacturer might have had a few costs, I suppose.

--

-Pip

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 01:49:04 -0800 (PST), ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Champ wrote:
>> Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>> >[1] Actually *every* source of energy kills more people than nuclear.
>> ><https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/?sh=4838faf45467>
>> *ding*
>>
>> How many coal miners have been killed, and that's before you even
>> start on those impacted by shit air quality
>
>Uranium, of course, mines itself.

True, except a large modern reactor like Sizewell B has about 100t of
fuel in the core. A refuelling cycle is somewhere between 12 and 24
months - I don't know exactly - and even then I think they rearrange
some of the fuel rather than swap it all out. Compare that to a
roughly equivalent coal-fired station that might burn 9000 tons of
coal per *day*.

I would imagine in fairness that coal is pretty concentrated fuel but
nuclear fuel ore isn't, so you'd need to mine considerably more ore
than you'd get in fuel.

--

-Pip

Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/16/2021 11:24 AM, Higgins wrote:
>> YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 16/12/2021 10:42, sweller wrote:
>>>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
>>>>>> means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
>>>>>> mitigate that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.
>>>>
>>>> The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> yeah, 'cos who is going to hijack a train?
>>>
>> There’s no point if you look at the design strength of the flasks and, even
>> if you gained access to the contents, you’re not going to last long enough
>> to move them anywhere.
>>
> "Suicide bomber" kinda eliminates the idea of a deterrent.
>

Wouldn’t even make a dent.

Pipl wrote:
> ogden wrote:
> >Champ wrote:
> >> How many coal miners have been killed, and that's before you even
> >> start on those impacted by shit air quality
> >
> >Uranium, of course, mines itself.
>
> True, except a large modern reactor like Sizewell B has about 100t of
> fuel in the core. A refuelling cycle is somewhere between 12 and 24
> months - I don't know exactly - and even then I think they rearrange
> some of the fuel rather than swap it all out. Compare that to a
> roughly equivalent coal-fired station that might burn 9000 tons of
> coal per *day*.
>
> I would imagine in fairness that coal is pretty concentrated fuel but
> nuclear fuel ore isn't, so you'd need to mine considerably more ore
> than you'd get in fuel.

This is far from my area of expertise, so probably bollocks, but a quick google tells me that uranium ore is about 0.1% yellowcake, natural uranium is about 0.7% U-235, and fuel-grade uranium is about 4% U-235. So to get a year's worth of fuel for the reactor my fag-packet maths reckons you're mining 600,000t of ore, or 1600t/day. Which is still less than the 9000t/day of coal, but rather more complicated to produce, a lot more lethal to handle, and vastly more complicated to get rid of aftwards (vs disappearing up a chimney).

On 16 Dec 2021 08:17:40 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote:

>Pipl wrote:
>
>> I still think that there should be continuous brass strips along all
>> routes so that cars can simply pull power off the Grid directly. Of
>> course, the vehicle would have to track the power feeds accurately, so
>> a simple slot between the two would do nicely. Who needs all that
>> complex smart vision technology?
>
>Bordeaux trams are quite clever in this regard. They have an exposed
>contact rail that is only live when the tram is over it.
>
>https://invisiblebordeaux.blogspot.com/2011/12/bordeaux-trams-underground-power.html

Neat.

--

-Pip

Pipl <pluscher@live.co.uk> wrote:
> On 16 Dec 2021 08:17:40 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>Pipl wrote:
>>
>>> I still think that there should be continuous brass strips along all
>>> routes so that cars can simply pull power off the Grid directly. Of
>>> course, the vehicle would have to track the power feeds accurately, so
>>> a simple slot between the two would do nicely. Who needs all that
>>> complex smart vision technology?
>>
>>Bordeaux trams are quite clever in this regard. They have an exposed
>>contact rail that is only live when the tram is over it.
>>
>>https://invisiblebordeaux.blogspot.com/2011/12/bordeaux-trams-underground-power.html
>
> Neat.

One wonders how secure the system for turning the power on and off is.

(Almost) along those lines... years ago, my workplace decided to close
off a frequently used hallway between our offices and the canteen. It
was to be dedicated to hauling parts back and forth from the "crib"
to the assembly/test area, and the parts were going to be hauled by
automated robot cars. Doors would be opened by coded signals from
infrared emitters on the front of the cars.

The controlled access part of the scheme was turned on, but with
humans driving little electric trucks, in hollowed out volcano Bond
villain style.

Not wanting to have to walk the extra distance to avoid the corridor
of doom, a couple of us decided to check out the claims of the
infrared signals being coded. Turns out, a simple infrared LED +
a dropping resistor + a battery & a switch was sufficient to trigger
the detector. Not even a 555 timer IC to generate pulses was necessary,
just thumbing the switch a few times.

--
FJR1300A, GL1000, KLR650A6F, EX250J9A, DR200SE, Vespa Ciao

On 12/16/2021 12:26 PM, Higgins wrote:
> Turby <xsurf@xmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/16/2021 11:24 AM, Higgins wrote:
>>> YTC#1 <bdp@ytc1-spambin.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 16/12/2021 10:42, sweller wrote:
>>>>> YTC#1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> (almost) forever. Transporting waste to a secure and reliable site
>>>>>>> means exposing it to terrorist action, and I don't see how you can
>>>>>>> mitigate that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparenlty we used to arm the ships we moved it around on.
>>>>>
>>>>> The trains, however, aren't and just in normal traffic.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> yeah, 'cos who is going to hijack a train?
>>>>
>>> There’s no point if you look at the design strength of the flasks and, even
>>> if you gained access to the contents, you’re not going to last long enough
>>> to move them anywhere.
>>>
>> "Suicide bomber" kinda eliminates the idea of a deterrent.
>
> Wouldn’t even make a dent.
>

1. Not all nuclear plants use the same storage units.
2. You don't think a terrorist organization could come up with a way to
get into them?

--
The erstwhile Thomas
FJR1300, R1200GS, ST1100 (in memoriam)

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:47:44 -0800 (PST), ogden <eldaifo@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Pipl wrote:
>> ogden wrote:
>> >Champ wrote:
>> >> How many coal miners have been killed, and that's before you even
>> >> start on those impacted by shit air quality
>> >
>> >Uranium, of course, mines itself.
>>
>> True, except a large modern reactor like Sizewell B has about 100t of
>> fuel in the core. A refuelling cycle is somewhere between 12 and 24
>> months - I don't know exactly - and even then I think they rearrange
>> some of the fuel rather than swap it all out. Compare that to a
>> roughly equivalent coal-fired station that might burn 9000 tons of
>> coal per *day*.
>>
>> I would imagine in fairness that coal is pretty concentrated fuel but
>> nuclear fuel ore isn't, so you'd need to mine considerably more ore
>> than you'd get in fuel.
>
>This is far from my area of expertise,

Me too, but I have read a lot about it. I even bought a book.

> so probably bollocks, but a quick google tells me that uranium ore is about 0.1% yellowcake,
>natural uranium is about 0.7% U-235, and fuel-grade uranium is about 4% U-235.
>So to get a year's worth of fuel for the reactor my fag-packet maths reckons you're mining 600,000t of ore, or 1600t/day.

That does look in the right ballpark, more than I thought to be
honest.

> Which is still less than the 9000t/day of coal, but rather more complicated to produce,

>a lot more lethal to handle,

Not really. You can handle metallic uranium, just wear rubber gloves
and don't lick it. Metallic uranium is however pyrophoric, which is
why it's usually formed into oxide pellets for use in commercial
reactors.

The common isotopes of uranium alpha decay, so the radiation is easy
to shield against. Some of the nuclides down the decay chain
beta-minus decay, but again, relatively easy to shield. A few nuclides
will occasionally decay by other means but these events are very
infrequent.

> and vastly more complicated to get rid of aftwards (vs disappearing up a chimney).

This is true, except unlike what goes up a chimney, it's mostly solid,
so relatively easy to sequester vitrified, though you don't need to
worry about terrorists bottling up CO2.

--

-Pip

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 21:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Mark Olson
<olsonm@tiny.invalid> wrote:

>Pipl <pluscher@live.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 16 Dec 2021 08:17:40 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Pipl wrote:
>>>
>>>> I still think that there should be continuous brass strips along all
>>>> routes so that cars can simply pull power off the Grid directly. Of
>>>> course, the vehicle would have to track the power feeds accurately, so
>>>> a simple slot between the two would do nicely. Who needs all that
>>>> complex smart vision technology?
>>>
>>>Bordeaux trams are quite clever in this regard. They have an exposed
>>>contact rail that is only live when the tram is over it.
>>>
>>>https://invisiblebordeaux.blogspot.com/2011/12/bordeaux-trams-underground-power.html
>>
>> Neat.
>
>One wonders how secure the system for turning the power on and off is.

I would hope at least as good as the speed controller on the tram
itself.

>(Almost) along those lines... years ago, my workplace decided to close
>off a frequently used hallway between our offices and the canteen. It
>was to be dedicated to hauling parts back and forth from the "crib"
>to the assembly/test area, and the parts were going to be hauled by
>automated robot cars. Doors would be opened by coded signals from
>infrared emitters on the front of the cars.

>The controlled access part of the scheme was turned on, but with
>humans driving little electric trucks, in hollowed out volcano Bond
>villain style.

Heh

>Not wanting to have to walk the extra distance to avoid the corridor
>of doom, a couple of us decided to check out the claims of the
>infrared signals being coded. Turns out, a simple infrared LED +
>a dropping resistor + a battery & a switch was sufficient to trigger
>the detector. Not even a 555 timer IC to generate pulses was necessary,
>just thumbing the switch a few times.

"Halt!"

"Switch bounce!"

"Pass, friend!"

--

-Pip