Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations

Quote from: inquisitive on April 19, 2014, 11:43:54 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 11:40:23 AM

Quote from: HeeHaw on April 19, 2014, 11:30:39 AM

I think nuclear power might be a bit too advanced for Scepti to explain how it works.  Maybe he can explain how Velcro works instead.

Something that does not exist is hardly going to be too advanced.

Do you live near a nuclear power station? What do the people who design, build and operate them do?

They operate what they believe is a nuclear power station. Why would they have any reason to think otherwise, except those at the very top who actually do know what's going on.

Scepti, your conspiracies keep growing.

Perhaps it would be easier for you to make a list of who ISN'T in on a conspiracy.

Quote from: inquisitive on April 19, 2014, 11:43:54 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 11:40:23 AM

Quote from: HeeHaw on April 19, 2014, 11:30:39 AM

I think nuclear power might be a bit too advanced for Scepti to explain how it works.  Maybe he can explain how Velcro works instead.

Something that does not exist is hardly going to be too advanced.

Do you live near a nuclear power station? What do the people who design, build and operate them do?

They operate what they believe is a nuclear power station. Why would they have any reason to think otherwise, except those at the very top who actually do know what's going on.

Do you live near one?

ps. Are you OK with sending millions of phone calls down a strand of glass?

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 11:46:56 AM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 19, 2014, 11:43:54 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 11:40:23 AM

Quote from: HeeHaw on April 19, 2014, 11:30:39 AM

I think nuclear power might be a bit too advanced for Scepti to explain how it works.  Maybe he can explain how Velcro works instead.

Something that does not exist is hardly going to be too advanced.

Do you live near a nuclear power station? What do the people who design, build and operate them do?

They operate what they believe is a nuclear power station. Why would they have any reason to think otherwise, except those at the very top who actually do know what's going on.

Scepti, your conspiracies keep growing.

Perhaps it would be easier for you to make a list of who ISN'T in on a conspiracy.

Very few people need to be in on any conspiracy, other than the few who really know what's what.
Millions of people drive cars and operate them with no problems, yet they know  Jack shit about how it all works and have to use garages to solve any problems.
People at power stations operate what they are told to in a way they are shown and told to stick to protocol. If they are told that the buttons they press, operate fuses for firecrackers then to them, they are firecracker power plants workers.
If they are told they are dealing with uranium pellets, then that's what they are dealing with, to their mind.

ps. Are you OK with sending millions of phone calls down a strand of glass?

I've never sent millions of phone calls down a strand of glass, so I wouldn't know.

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

It takes electrical power to separate water. You could not get the more power from combining hydrogen and oxygen then the power it took to separate.

Quote from: inquisitive on April 19, 2014, 11:53:07 AM

ps. Are you OK with sending millions of phone calls down a strand of glass?

I've never sent millions of phone calls down a strand of glass, so I wouldn't know.

But you agree it could work.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 10:49:51 AM

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

It takes electrical power to separate water. You could not get the more power from combining hydrogen and oxygen then the power it took to separate.

No you can't, if you look at it from the action/reaction thought.
Hydrogen is abundant and can be extracted in abundance using less  (monetry wise) resources to achieve it.
It like a wind turbine can give you electrical power from the wind and to us, it's a monetry wise cheap way of getting electricity. It still takes an equal power to produce equal power, except that it is coming from the centre of the Earth as the main feed, (the sun) and charging the atmosphere in which low and high pressures, (winds) are gained from it to turn a blade which turns a turbine which produces electricity from the atmosphere.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 12:00:32 PM

Quote from: inquisitive on April 19, 2014, 11:53:07 AM

ps. Are you OK with sending millions of phone calls down a strand of glass?

I've never sent millions of phone calls down a strand of glass, so I wouldn't know.

But you agree it could work.

Yes, why? I'm not questioning fibre optics. There's lots of stuff I have no desire to question.

Then what is the fuss about north Korea trying to developing nuclear stations or weapons. Is your old country a fake also?

Quote from: Starman on April 19, 2014, 12:10:47 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 10:49:51 AM

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

It takes electrical power to separate water. You could not get the more power from combining hydrogen and oxygen then the power it took to separate.

No you can't, if you look at it from the action/reaction thought.
Hydrogen is abundant and can be extracted in abundance using less  (monetry wise) resources to achieve it.
It like a wind turbine can give you electrical power from the wind and to us, it's a monetry wise cheap way of getting electricity. It still takes an equal power to produce equal power, except that it is coming from the centre of the Earth as the main feed, (the sun) and charging the atmosphere in which low and high pressures, (winds) are gained from it to turn a blade which turns a turbine which produces electricity from the atmosphere.

But you said electrolysis. And also if hydrogen is abandon where?

Then what is the fuss about north Korea trying to developing nuclear stations or weapons. Is your old country a fake also?

I'm one person. Do you expect me to know what goes on behind the scenes? I'm questioning stuff that I think has alternative means to it's structure.
If I actually knew 100%, then I wouldn't be questioning it or having any thoughts on anything, because I would already know.

Here is the main production of hydrogen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 12:17:59 PM

Quote from: Starman on April 19, 2014, 12:10:47 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 10:49:51 AM

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

It takes electrical power to separate water. You could not get the more power from combining hydrogen and oxygen then the power it took to separate.

No you can't, if you look at it from the action/reaction thought.
Hydrogen is abundant and can be extracted in abundance using less  (monetry wise) resources to achieve it.
It like a wind turbine can give you electrical power from the wind and to us, it's a monetry wise cheap way of getting electricity. It still takes an equal power to produce equal power, except that it is coming from the centre of the Earth as the main feed, (the sun) and charging the atmosphere in which low and high pressures, (winds) are gained from it to turn a blade which turns a turbine which produces electricity from the atmosphere.

But you said electrolysis. And also if hydrogen is abandon where?

I never mentioned abandoning it. They can still use it. Why would they abandon it if it's a good power source?
If you want to abandon it, that's your choice.

Here is the main production of hydrogen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production

What you telling me this for?

Quote from: Starman on April 19, 2014, 12:26:58 PM

Here is the main production of hydrogen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production

What you telling me this for?

Here is what you said: "Hydrogen is abundant and can be extracted in abundance using less  (monetry wise) resources to achieve it." I am showing how it is done. You could not use hydrogen as a fuel for nuclear plants as you deny.

Why would someone run a conspiracy to pretend to have nuclear power?  Nuclear power is controversial because of various public concerns.  A conspiracy working the other way would make more sense, to say you have a safer, cleaner power plant but it is secretly a nuclear plant.  There's no benefit to a pretend nuclear conspiracy. 

Why would someone run a conspiracy to pretend to have nuclear power?  Nuclear power is controversial because of various public concerns.  A conspiracy working the other way would make more sense, to say you have a safer, cleaner power plant but it is secretly a nuclear plant.  There's no benefit to a pretend nuclear conspiracy.

Scepti is a contrarian. He does not want to admit to fusion because it implies how the sun works. Deny everything. Here is another question. How does a hydrogen bomb works?

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

So they take electricity, split water, then use the hydrogen to create electricity?  Do you not see the problem with that?  Assuming zero loss between each step, they are taking something running it through a process and coming back out with the same something.  Now when you factor in that electrolysis creates heat, and is not nearly 100% efficient, you are getting LESS useful energy out than you are putting in.  Makes no sense.  WHy not just take the electricity and send it to the grid?

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 10:49:51 AM

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

So they take electricity, split water, then use the hydrogen to create electricity?  Do you not see the problem with that?  Assuming zero loss between each step, they are taking something running it through a process and coming back out with the same something.  Now when you factor in that electrolysis creates heat, and is not nearly 100% efficient, you are getting LESS useful energy out than you are putting in.  Makes no sense.  WHy not just take the electricity and send it to the grid?

Scepti jumps in "I know everything mode" and spits out things without thinking.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 10:49:51 AM

Quote from: BJ1234 on April 19, 2014, 09:37:54 AM

So, how do they take the hydrogen from the water scepti?

By electrolysis.

So they take electricity, split water, then use the hydrogen to create electricity?  Do you not see the problem with that?  Assuming zero loss between each step, they are taking something running it through a process and coming back out with the same something.  Now when you factor in that electrolysis creates heat, and is not nearly 100% efficient, you are getting LESS useful energy out than you are putting in.  Makes no sense.  Why not just take the electricity and send it to the grid?

sceptimatic seriously needs to read up on the First and Second Laws of thermodynamics.  I'm repeatedly surprised that for someone who's proved the earth is flat (with a complex and expensive laser/flat ice sheet experiment) plus invented many things we now buy in our stores he has so little knowledge of physics.  Even stuff that high school kids understand.

Possibly his father—who's a world-renowned scientist—never gave the young sceptimatic much of his time?  One would think though as he's extremely wealthy, that sceptimatic would invest in a little more time and money into tertiary education.  He obviously has no need to work full time, as he makes numerous holiday trips to North Korea throughout the year, and, unlike other Westerners, without any special dispensation from the NK government.

And by the way sceptimatic, the high cost/low efficiency of water electrolysis is the main reason we're not running our cars on hydrogen.  Electrolysis is only around 60% efficient, so that 1kg of hydrogen (specific energy = 40 kWh/kg) requires 65kWh of electricity to produce.  This hydrogen then works at to around three times the price of natural gas as a fuel.
 

Quote from: Pythagoras on April 19, 2014, 10:07:41 AM

for

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 09:30:00 AM

I don't believe they do exist. I believe they work on the basis of taking hydrogen from the water and generating power that way, in the main.
I do not believe in fissioning uranium or plutonium that do anything of the sort in what and how we are told they do.

completely ignoring the fact it takes energy to extract hydrogen from water. not adding up so far.

Of course it takes energy, except it is an energy that can be produced using water as an efficient fuel. Have a think about the hydrogen cars and that should give you a clue about how much energy you can produce from using water by extracting the hydrogen gas from it, with a by product of water from it.
That's your nuclear power stations in my opinion.

lol, why do you think water electrolysis is not a good way to make power? Because you input more electricity in the system than you get from the pressure of the gases... It's also a very slow process, unless you add in even more power. It's a lose-lose situation.

And LOL, what kind of idiot denies Hiroshima and Nagasaki? He just stopped even lower than before xD

You people are just not clued up at all. I can't even beging to answer the utter rubbish you've all spouted since I was gone.
One day the lightbulb may come on but I seriously doubt it with a lot of you.

how about you walk us through step by step as if we are children using terms a child could understand how in your opinion the nuclear power stations work

You people are just not clued up at all. I can't even beging to answer the utter rubbish you've all spouted since I was gone.
One day the lightbulb may come on but I seriously doubt it with a lot of you.

Again.. how does a nuclear power station work?

Just watch him deny all the test nukes too... So pathetic...

You people are just not clued up at all. I can't even begin to answer the utter rubbish you've all spouted since I was gone.
One day the lightbulb may come on but I seriously doubt it with a lot of you.

Apparently childish ad hominem attacks are the best ammunition sceptimatic now has? 

How truly pathetic..... but nonetheless typical whenever he's so frequently backed into a corner LOL.
 

how about you walk us through step by step as if we are children using terms a child could understand how in your opinion the nuclear power stations work

Basically your nuclear power station is a massive hydrogen cell battery.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 19, 2014, 02:32:09 PM

You people are just not clued up at all. I can't even begin to answer the utter rubbish you've all spouted since I was gone.
One day the lightbulb may come on but I seriously doubt it with a lot of you.

Apparently childish ad hominem attacks are the best ammunition sceptimatic now has? 

How truly pathetic..... but nonetheless typical whenever he's so frequently backed into a corner LOL.

Button it Geoffrey with your silly ad hominem attack crap. Who in the hell actually says this in real life. Get a grip. 

Please walk us through step by step like you would a child how they work