Europe's Heatwave is Forcing Nuclear Power Plants To Shut Down (qz.com) 281
Europe's heatwave -- which led to wildfires in Greece and Sweden, droughts in central and northern parts, and made the normally green UK look brown from space -- is forcing nuclear plants to shut down or curtail the amount of power they produce, local media reports. From a report: French utility EDF shut four reactors at three power plants on Saturday, Swedish utility Vattenfall shut one of two reactors at a power plant earlier last week, and nuclear plants in Finland, Germany, and Switzerland have cut back the amount of power they produce. Thermal power plants, such as nuclear or coal, use high-temperature steam to turn turbines, which convert heat energy into electricity. In the process, the steam's temperature falls, so it can no longer be used to move the turbine again. [...] Europe's heatwave, however, hasn't just increased air temperatures but also water temperatures.
We care about climate change (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with climate change isn't so much as our planet breaking but everything we depend on breaking. Somewhat wacky that nuclear reactors aren't designed to handle this heat but then again I would have never imagined the crazy kind of temperatures Europe has skyrocketed up to. So one has to wonder, what other stuff is going to break?
Re:We care about climate change (Score:4, Informative)
The problem with climate change isn't so much as our planet breaking but everything we depend on breaking. Somewhat wacky that nuclear reactors aren't designed to handle this heat but then again I would have never imagined the crazy kind of temperatures Europe has skyrocketed up to. So one has to wonder, what other stuff is going to break?
Nuclear reactors can handle high temps just fine. Only in places where there is limited cooling water and cooling releases rise above local environmental limits are they cut back.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com]
In Germany, recently, nuclear was a steady producer while wind was barely producing.
https://www.energy-charts.de/p... [energy-charts.de]
Re: (Score:2)
Only in places where there is limited cooling water
You make it sound like they just built the plants in the wrong place.
Nuclear plants have some pretty difficult requirements for location. You need somewhere that is geologically stable, where there is sufficient space and isolation to build the plant, waste storage and security apparatus. It needs a supply of water for cooling. It needs to be sheltered from severe weather and natural disasters as far as possible. And it has to have good infrastructure to keep it supplied, connect it to the grid and allow st
Re: (Score:2)
You make it sound like they just built the plants in the wrong place.
No, I never hinted they were. They operate at very high capacity factors even in the very few places where very infrequent restrictions come in to play.
Re: (Score:2)
Nuclear plants have specific cooling requirements. The problem is that the cooling water they use, as it gets warmer, they need more water in order to perform at the same cooling level. As such, either they max out the amount of water they can draw at the intake (either through environmental limits to limit the heat released into
Re:We care about climate change (Score:4, Informative)
Germany produces 3 times more power from wind than from nuclear. Moron ...
Which is pretty clearly visible on your cherry picked graph.
You miss the point. Germany has stupidly shut down nuclear plants, but nuclear is still available when needed, unlike wind. One chooses charts to illustrate points, I chose one illustrating what is happening during a heat wave. Sorry you don't like that.
For the heat wave weeks, nuclear generated more than wind. Even with 58 GW installed wind vs 9.5 GW installed nuclear.
https://www.energy-charts.de/e... [energy-charts.de]
https://www.energy-charts.de/e... [energy-charts.de]
https://www.energy-charts.de/e... [energy-charts.de]
https://www.energy-charts.de/e... [energy-charts.de]
Re: (Score:3)
It is not a terrible deep insight that wind is intermittent power source. It is also not new that there is less wind in the summer. On the other hand, there is more solar and the total production from renewables is surprisingly stable: https://www.energy-charts.de/r... [energy-charts.de] Always about 35% which in summary is much more than nuclear.
Your charts highlight another point: The renewables clearly cut into consumption of coal and lignite. This is very good.
And there is another thing to learn: Nuclear is always runnin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You miss the point. Germany has stupidly shut down nuclear plants, but nuclear is still available when needed, unlike wind.
I think you miss the point. German population fought to get rid of nuclear power since 50 years. When the red/green government under Schroeder finally planned the exit, we all were happy.
Then came Merkel and canceled the exit.
Then came Fukushima and Merkel reintroduced the exit.
There is nothing stupid in that.
Why you pick cherry picked graphs to prove a point which you don't have, is b
Re: We care about climate change (Score:2)
Re: We care about climate change (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Over the course of a year nuclear produces about 10% of our power, wind about 30% and renewables in total over 40%.
Germany has between 9 and 10 GW of operating nuclear power capacity. Germany also has 5 GW of hydro, 40 GW of solar PV, and 50 GW of wind turbine, in operating electrical generation capacity. So ten times the installed renewable capacity produced only four times the energy of nuclear.
Look at France on the other hand, 65% of all power comes from nukes ... they will probably shut down 20% - 30% of them during August ... and buy coal power on the European market. So much for your beloved nuclear power.
France has over 60 GW of electrical generation capacity from nuclear, which produces over 80% of its electricity. France has 25 GW of hydro producing over 10% of its electricity. France has over 10 GW of installed wind and
Re: (Score:3)
You miss the point. Germany has stupidly shut down nuclear plants, but nuclear is still available when needed, unlike wind.
But they were available. If you look deeper than headlines, you might realize such. I even provided links to make it easy for folks like you.
Re: (Score:2)
So, if a nuke plant is offline it's available, but if a wind tower if offline it isn't. Got it.
At /., accuracy and completeness isn't as important as the narrative.... Mr D from 63 (seriously, just a little ways down)
How Ironic.
If nuclear plants are generating power, as they were throughout the heat wave, then they are not offline. Your attempt at being a smart ass is pretty futile when I've provided links to charts showing the steady output of nuclear. Go ahead, profess your ignorance.
Re:We care about climate change (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.world-nuclear-news.... [world-nuclear-news.org]
Re: (Score:2)
One of the ones having delayed maintenance (Hanbit) was one of the plants affected by the fake certification scandal. Suppliers of about 6000 parts to the plant faked the certifications on them. Some were removed and replaced, others were just left there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.ibtimes.com/south-... [ibtimes.com]
Over 7,600 forged certificates.
Nuke vs wind (vs Solar) (Score:2)
So, if a nuke plant is offline it's available,
Yes, because you could restart it whenever you would like simply by pushing a (metaphorical) button.
Germany simply legally choose not to, in order to avoid dumping too much waste heat in the lake and rivers which are used to cool the loop.
But if Germany decided to change that law (or to ignore it due to an emergency), there are no technical limitation in restarting the plant (well, nit-picking : to actually *ramp up the output back to full capacity*, it's not really completely shut down)
but if a wind tower if offline it isn't. Got it.
Because no matter ho
Re: (Score:2)
Germany produces 3 times more power from wind than from nuclear. Moron ...
Which is pretty clearly visible on your cherry picked graph.
Also, your statement is false. Wind only produced about 1.5 times nuclear last year and so far this year. But don't let facts get in the way of your complaint.
https://www.energy-charts.de/e... [energy-charts.de]
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how the nuclear power plant is designed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That was the old rule. The new rule is, it depends upon how many batteries were in the system. So I would design the burbs with every millimetre of roof as a solar panel and one battery pack for the home and one battery pack for the grid. A distributed power station, where the power station and it's grid is already built, all you need to do is add the generators (solar panels and smaller low noise vertical axis wind turbines) and batteries. You get the system in place, by people directly investing in their
Re: We care about climate change (Score:2)
Re: We care about climate change (Score:2)
The problem isn't that the water is too warm to run the plant. The problem is that heating lake water to 100+ degrees (F) will kill just about everything that lives in the lake (except algae, which will bloom like crazy and suffocate whatever the higher water temperature didn't kill directly), so they throttled back the plant to avoid overheating the lake.
Re: (Score:3)
Nuclear production has reduced by less than 1GW in Germany as a result of this. In the meantime the daily cycle from solar goes from 28GW to 0. Wind was 9GW 3 days ago and 2GW the day before that.
I think we'll be just fine with things "breaking".
The Gulf Stream (Score:2)
So one has to wonder, what other stuff is going to break?
If you live in Europe you had better hope the Gulf Stream [wikipedia.org] isn't one of the things that "breaks". If that happens just remember that the northern parts of the USA are roughly the latitude of Spain. The weather would get... interesting to say the least.
Re: (Score:2)
So how do we explain that two Brazilian nuclear plants operate under those conditions most of the time?
The same reason the lunar rover worked on the moon, but your own car won't.
No cooling towers? (Score:2)
N/T
Re: (Score:3)
Cooling towers don't cool the water enough. Need more cooling tower surface area, or a larger reservoir to dump the warmed water back into.
Re: No cooling towers? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Cooling towers are used in many plants, nuclear and coal, and seem to work.
Cooling towers work to specifications they are built to. I believe what the parent is saying, is that the current heat wave is driving things past those specifications. Cooling towers would work, as would large water reservoir but they'd have to be rebuilt, perhaps from the ground up and the current conditions would probably be over by time the money was paid and the work done. That's assume they had the money and available water, but they certainly don't have the time.
I thought nuclear power was the answer to AGW? (Score:4, Insightful)
On the "bright" side, there's a lot of sun right now for the PV panels!
Re: (Score:3)
Solar PV output drops with heat.
https://energytransition.org/2... [energytransition.org]
One reason the situation wasnâ(TM)t worse in Germany, of course, was the large number of solar arrays. But even their output is negatively impacted during heat waves; efficiency drops by up to 0.5 percent per degree Celsius â" and the panel temperature counts, not the air. Fortunately, temperatures in Germany still do not rise as much as they do in Spain, where the effect was greater.
Re: (Score:3)
Solar PV output drops with heat.
And why is that relevant when we now have 18h sun every day since 10 weeks?
Re: I thought nuclear power was the answer to AGW? (Score:2)
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
You're wrong. How well does that light work through with 90% humidity? Cause that's what living around the great lakes, and south-east US is like in the summer. It's down right tropical and always has been, the very rare cases are when the jetstream dips and pushes humid air away or levels it out through the mountains in KY and TN. It gets worse of course, because you also don't get any real wind during these cases and they can go on for over a month during the peak summer. We're at around 27 days betwe
Reason why reactors were shut down (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA, the reason why the reactors were shut down (which wasn't included in the summary) is:
Yeah, I know that reading TFA is no longer cool on Slashdot, but someone has to help out the editors. :P
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
From TFA, the reason why the reactors were shut down (which wasn't included in the summary) is:
Yeah, I know that reading TFA is no longer cool on Slashdot, but someone has to help out the editors. :P
At /., accuracy and completeness isn't as important as the narrative.
No longer? I've been here ten years (Score:4, Informative)
"No longer cool?" I've been on Slashdot and it sure seems to me that most people I've talked to here never read past the second sentence of the summary, much less the article.
Sometimes it's frustrating, sometimes it's fun when we have this exchange:
MD Solar: Fucking Trump screwing everything up again.
Me: The first sentence of the summary is "In 2015, the TSA stripped searched 4,800 people". Can you read the first two words? I didn't know Trump was running the TSA in 2015.
Re: (Score:2)
"No longer cool?" I've been on Slashdot and it sure seems to me that most people I've talked to here never read past the second sentence of the summary, much less the article.
Sometimes it's frustrating, sometimes it's fun when we have this exchange:
MD Solar: Fucking Trump screwing everything up again.
Me: The first sentence of the summary is "In 2015, the TSA stripped searched 4,800 people". Can you read the first two words? I didn't know Trump was running the TSA in 2015.
Second sentence of the summary?
I barely even finished the second word of the title!
Advantage of SMRs (Score:2)
Of course, it is far better to not and instead use the waste heat to desalinate water.
Lousy article (Score:3)
"Europe's Heatwave is Forcing Coal Power Plants To Shut Down" is just as valid for the title, but nuclear is so much more click-baity...
And the reason they are being shut down is to avoid pumping too much waste heat into the environment, since that would be bad for the ecosystem. It's not some kind of generator failure we should all lose sleep over.
Re: (Score:2)
Also no mention of reduced wind energy production from the heat wave. It doesn't take much to find news articles on European wind output dropping, especially in UK and Germany that made large investments in wind power recently.
Here's one example of such a news report:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news... [bloomberg.com]
When temperatures rise every electrical generation system we have in common use is affected. Thermal plants that boil water will often have to reduce output or shutdown because the cooling water exceeds minimu
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting because some people are promoting nuclear power as the solution to "base load" and CO2 emissions. Unfortunately they are not actually very good at either of them.
Coal is affected too but no-one except Trump is suggesting that we use more coal, so the fact that coal plants also suck is less interesting (and also very well understood).
As well as solar, natural gas is doing very well too since it doesn't need nearly as much cooling as nuclear or coal.
But solar energy is way up (Score:2)
I'm so glad nuclear fission ... (Score:2)
... is going to save us from global warming. ...
Solar Baseload Option (Score:2)
High temperature molten salt solar [solarreserve.com] is quickly developing into an excellent base-load power option. We know that the sun will be shining in the future or we'd have much bigger problems.
It looks awesome too!
Oh, look...a twofer (Score:2)
It's not often we get a chance to see the GW Denier trolls and the "nuclear will solve every problem" trolls all partying together on the same page.
This is a real treat.
Re:uhhh cool the water then? (Score:5, Interesting)
Nuke plants mostly perform well in hot weather and carry the system when other sources are struggling. A few reactors have to cut back due to heat limits on cooling water. The total percentage of nuclear reduction across the board is less than 10%. Meanwhile, wind power during the recent heat wave was down over 80%. Nuclear was carrying the load. Particularly it was critical in late afternoon and evening when solar fades. There were times when wind production during these critical times dropped below 1% of demand.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/europes-power-prices-rise-as-heat-wave-saps-wind-from-turbines
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-01/scorching-start-to-august-set-to-test-europe-s-power-system
Re: (Score:2)
Technical nitpick: this is about heat sink water, not coolant. The too-warm heat sink problem is why ocean water is a preferred heat sink for thermal plants. This affects ALL thermal power plants and has nothing especially to do with nuclear.
Re:uhhh cool the water then? (Score:5, Informative)
It's a terrible summary.
The problem is that the water is chilled... but it's chilled by running it through colder water, usually pulled from a lake or a stream. Usually this isn't a problem, because the waste heat doesn't disrupt the ecosystem too much.
Right now, however, the environment is so warm that adding the waste heat would push temperatures above acceptable levels, killing the local ecosystem. Instead, the reactors are shut down to minimize the amount of heat they have to dissipate.
Re:uhhh cool the water then? (Score:4, Interesting)
Waste heat from power plants can be a HUGE problem to local ecosystems. There's rivers in the US where power plants have raised the water temperature 20 degrees and essentially displaced the entire habitat.
Steam generation is 19th century technology that's just plain awful in low water or high temperature areas. We've got power plants in the western US that use more water than the entire local population, water that's just pumped into the atmosphere rather than supporting the local ecosystem. Solar and storage are at the point where we can stop using this ancient technology, it's long since time that steam generation should be abandoned in any area where water is at a premium.
Re:uhhh cool the water then? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's rivers in the US where power plants have raised the water temperature 20 degrees and essentially displaced the entire habitat.
An exaggeration. But do you know how much habitat Hydro power has displaced by comparison?
Re: (Score:2)
rahvin112 made a claim. You denied it, but didn't provide any evidence. I did a quick google and found http://iopscience.iop.org/arti... [iop.org] which suggests a 10C rise, which is in the region of 20f.
You then tried some whataboutism in the hope that no-one would bother to validate your claim and start thinking about hydro power instead, even though rahvin112 was suggesting solar+storage as the alternative.
Re: (Score:2)
rahvin112 made a claim. You denied it, but didn't provide any evidence. I did a quick google and found http://iopscience.iop.org/arti... [iop.org] which suggests a 10C rise, which is in the region of 20f.
You then tried some whataboutism in the hope that no-one would bother to validate your claim and start thinking about hydro power instead, even though rahvin112 was suggesting solar+storage as the alternative.
That link does not show that the heating 'displaced the entire habitat', which was the claim. He made the claim, if he can back it up he should respond with the source. I say its total bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay. And your whataboutism, care to defend that?
Re: (Score:2)
There is no whataboutism there. The fact that the link doesn't even scientifically show what the other poster claimed is where the bullshit is. It's taking other data, painting it together, and claiming it is proof. There were no readings, there was no long-term study, hell there wasn't even a short-term study. The entire thing boiled down to "temperature is the cause" and "ecosystem disruption" by painting the two together to paint a story and not even looking for an actual cause.
Problem: Their own dat
Re: (Score:2)
No, the stuff about hydro power.
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that they created the lake for the nuke plant, but to be fair they also have a 1MW hydro plant installed there as well. That's half of the Hoover Dam's capacity - nothing to sneeze at!
Re: (Score:2)
HAHA! Got me. I'm only off by 3 orders of magnitude, though - so there's that.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeaaup, I'm off by 1000. Good enough for government work.
Re: (Score:2)
Waste thermal-plant heat can be directed for useful purposes also, such as keeping Arctic towns warm. The biggest voting bloc in favor of nuclear plants in Florida is manatees, which flock to them in winter to bask in the warm water.
Re: (Score:3)
Right now, however, the environment is so warm that adding the waste heat would push temperatures above acceptable levels, killing the local ecosystem.
Something that is in fact already happening [euronews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Did you read the article? Did you notice how it said oxygen starvation? Notice the picture? Notice how far the river is out from the normal "width" of it? Notice all those rocks which would be in the shallows and add to oxygenation? So we have no rain, which lowers the river, we have dredging to deepen the river. This makes a slow moving river with low oxygenation now. Add in that fertilizer runoff has been a serious problem for decades, and fertilizer causes massive lower end booms in population whic
Re: (Score:2)
It's a terrible summary.
The problem is that the water is chilled... but it's chilled by running it through colder water, usually pulled from a lake or a stream. Usually this isn't a problem, because the waste heat doesn't disrupt the ecosystem too much.
Right now, however, the environment is so warm that adding the waste heat would push temperatures above acceptable levels, killing the local ecosystem. Instead, the reactors are shut down to minimize the amount of heat they have to dissipate.
If true that's a pretty critical point.
It implies the Nuclear plants could be run in these temperatures if it were really critical, they're just shutting them down because there are other power sources with fewer side effects.
Re: (Score:3)
When you say "chill the water", what that inevitably means is putting the heat somewhere else. You can't magic it away, it has to go somewhere, and you have to build some kind of heat exchanger that gets it there.
So where would you put the heat? The obvious answer is the atmosphere, but consider that this was an option open to engineers when they designed the plant. They *could* have condensed the turbine working fluid by exchanging the heat with the atmosphere like the air conditioner in your house, whi
Re: (Score:2)
Great fishing in warm waters depends on the what you're fishing for. American bass (which are actually sunfish) are warm water species and do well in unnaturally warm waters. Trout, salmon, northern pike, and walleye are cool water species which often can't survive elevated temperatures.
Some cool water game fish are warm tolerant, others not. The most important game fish of Europe are trout and salmon, which die when exposed to warm water. There are fishing subcultures that go after "coarse fish" (which
Re: (Score:2)
"Seriously, why not just chill the water?"
They do. The massive towers around the plant are cooling towers. :-)
But even those don't cool the water enough to be able to send it back to the river without killing all the fauna, because the river is already hot and also it doesn't have enough water in the first place.
In winter, the river is frozen and they can't use them either.
And still they want us to believe that they can work around the clock, unlike solar and wind.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You should of learned in high school physics
And you should've learned in elementary school how contractions work.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
" You should of learned in high school "
Have. They also teach that in high school.
Re: (Score:3)
Thereby violating the third law of thermodynamics. You should of learned in high school physics perpetual energy machines dont work, Silly child.
It's not a perpetual energy machine, the input energy comes from the radioactive decay of Uranium, not from the water.
Re: (Score:2)
You have a strange idea of "efficiency".
Nuclear reactors don't have a heat pump, what would be the purpose?
I would love to know the power consumption of a nuclear facility's coolant pumps.
In relation to the power a plant produces: zero.
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:5, Informative)
The cooling water drawn from rivers, lakes, or seas will get more warm in hooter weather as more cooling water is needed.
German laws put limits on how hot cooling water can be when returned to such "rivers, lakes, or seas".
Laws limited the exisiting cooling engineering.
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:4, Funny)
The cooling water drawn from rivers, lakes, or seas will get more warm in hooter weather as more cooling water is needed.
This is presumably weather so warm that women take off their tops.
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:5, Informative)
This is europe, we do that even in the cold weather.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the average person generates 1kw of heat/hour, adding millions of new citizens to Europe each year must be the equivalent of adding a nuclear reactors all over the continent.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, the watt is a unit of instantaneous power. Energy over time is measured in watt-hours (Wh).
For example, a heater that produces 1000W of heat running for 1 hour would produce 1000Wh of heat energy.
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:2)
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For an average office worker we assume about 250 btuh (75 watts±) of sensible heat and 200 btuh (60 watts±) of latent heat (evaporating sweat) for a total of a little less than 135 watts.
For heavy exercise, about 700 btuh (210 watts±) of sensible heat and 1100 btuh (320 watts±) of latent heat, for a total of about 530 watts per person.
Re: (Score:2)
I meant that the human body generates about 100w/heat an hour. Even been in crowded room? It gets quite hot rapidly. Add a few million new residents, and it's like installing patio heaters all over the place.
Re: (Score:3)
How is a law preventing damage to the ecosystem of the rivers is a "political problem"?
Re: (Score:2)
The laws impose restrictions, but not a limit it in the sense that there is no way around by adding more money; ie: build water ponds where the heat is allowed to rise much higher temperatures (without being returned to a river).
That would make the initial cost of building the plant less appealing by building upfront for a scenario that hasn't occurred yet.
It has now.
Re: (Score:2)
Your fridge is a heat pump. ... an engineer would know that.
A power plant using a steam turbine is not
Re: (Score:2)
An interesting fact is that heat pumps (like home air conditioners, refrigerators, or nuclear power plants) are actually in the range of 200% to 600% efficient, apparently violating that wonderful law
No system and process in over 100% efficient. If you compare different properties of different processes, you aren't truly comparing efficiency. Heat pump efficiency is how efficient it is at moving heat. How much energy is put in, how much heat is moved. For electric heat, it is how much heat is transformed or released from a different energy form to heat.
Nuclear steam cycles are not heat pumps because the heat energy is primarily converted to mechanical energy. Yes, there are heat moving elements of th
Re: uhhh cool the water then? (Score:2)
Well technically he's right. If Europe starts to experience 1,000 degree temperatures, those cores will have a tough time getting cooled down. Not sure anyone will care, but, you know ...
Re:Poor design. It's not my problem (Score:5, Informative)
Poor design. All over the world there are nuclear plants operating just fine in hot tropical and subtropical climates, including the USA. Never has been a problem. So the Euros are doing something wrong with their designs.
Almost all the European nukes are running just fine, full output. Only a few have cut back due to discharge heat limits.
Re: (Score:2)
Poor design. All over the world there are nuclear plants operating just fine in hot tropical and subtropical climates, including the USA. Never has been a problem. So the Euros are doing something wrong with their designs.
Almost all the European nukes are running just fine, full output. Only a few have cut back due to discharge heat limits.
Oh. So, it's not an OMG problem?
Re: (Score:3)
wrong,
it's just done out of concern for causing too much heating in the water around the plant, limiting environmental damage. the plants could work fine even if temperature were higher.
this isn't even that newsworthy, happens some years.
Re: (Score:2)
it's just done out of concern for causing too much heating in the water around the plant, limiting environmental damage. the plants could work fine even if temperature were higher.
Yes, that is generally the concern with nuclear plants... that they will cause death. And death of stuff in rivers has health repercussions for humans.
Re: (Score:2)
So the Euros are doing something wrong with their designs.
Nothing wrong with any designs. Designs have conditions on them, when those conditions are breached your design project needs to take measures.
You should try suddenly freezing your hot tropical nuclear reactors and see how long they last.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just think of all the free energy we could get if only we could find a way to make use of the friction your mouth generates on all those cocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you actually use the average properties of the universe as an, um, 'data', point about what sources terrestrial electricity production should use? Because 'the universe' is so representative of conditions on earth in other respects? Is having an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere, rather than an almost complete vacuum also a liberal conspiracy?
Plus, I think that you might have been a trifle sloppy lu
Re: Leftism is destroying the Earth (Score:2)
In fact, if you venture outside during the day you can see the one we already have installed and (mostly uneventfully) supply most of earth's energy requirements...
Maybe you should stop turning it off for half of every fucking day ...
Re: Leftism is destroying the Earth (Score:2)
I see that THEY got to you ...
Re: (Score:2)
When plankton get too hot, they release chemicals into the ocean and atmosphere that encourages cloud formation.