Tag Archives: nuclear reactor

August 15, 2025 · 18:08

Walking back needs

I was in a rush to find another topic to look at and no sooner was it said when my brain told me to look behind me and no sooner was it done when I noticed a Bloomberg article

This sounds odd (and correct) as the Houston Business Journal gives us a little less than 18 hour ago ‘Texans face potential electricity price surge as power demand skyrockets’, it is odd as I noticed that term was a setting a mere 2-3 years ago. I gave the setting towards an IP idea I had. It was clear that this setting would be needed in Dubai, London and a few other places. I gave the Texan setting of Austin as a reference. As such I gave the idea that a few people should talk to Elon Musk as he is sitting on a trillion dollar idea and it would be needed all over the world. So, as some ‘now’ see that there is a larger problem, which I illustrated in ‘Is it a public service’ on November 16th 2024 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/is-it-a-public-service/) where I clearly stated that the energy is mission for a lot of this. We get the setting three months later in Bloomberg and now we get the Houston Business Journal giving us “With new data center developments, population growth and the electrification of oil fields, power demand growth is tightening the electricity market. Here’s what experts predict for the coming years.” As well as “With a rise in data center developments, population growth, and the electrification of oilfields, power demand growth is tightening the electricity market.” The latter part is a little hilarious. A setting that could be construed as the headline for the new comedy capers. What makes it a lot harder is the need Bloomberg gave us (and me months before that) that as I see it, corporate America has to foot that bill as the Data Centre needs will be required to get filled from day one, and as I see it the people of Texas need to pay ZERO. I do like the idea that corporate America will decrease the cost of living for Americans, especially when they are ‘required’ to remain carbon zero and 30 nuclear reactors are not the way to go. And this is given a lot more urgency as Americans are faced with the needs to make more electricity and the timelines to not align, especially in light of the news by Houston Business Journal given less than 24 hours ago. The other setting is that nuclear reactors require time and experience to build. As I see it, the Need for at least 3 GEN3+ reactors require at least 5 years and that is setting the reactors close to Houston and Austin. The third one should be right next to the data centre that Texas is handed. Oh, and these reactors need to be started within the next 3 months. So, when were these plans approved that fast? If not, there is little reason for a data centre when the electricity is apparently missing.

The fact that the American people (the HBJ too) were apparently missing this information whilst I using a simple slide ruler (classic model shown below)

Got there in mere seconds almost a year ago, and I was courteous enough to write about it. So there is that to consider. Funny enough America has the solution employing the solutions by Elon Musk. I advice then to act, before the UAE (and Saudi Arabia) asks for all the batteries that Elon has in stock. That is one idea, there are more ideas and they are out there. Yet the settings are now given by the HBJ and will set Texas on a stampede for solutions I reckon no later than coming Monday.

So when it does come, I would advice some people to walk back the needs of energy requirements and see where that leads them. The funny part is that this was a given BEFORE the Stargate project was on everyones retinas. Even as I gave my setting BEFORE Stargate, the setting becomes on why this wasn’t clearly given as project Stargate was drawn up? As we see the answers, more questions are shown on our eyes and this is the mere start of this. At present there are two operational nuclear power plants: Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant and the South Texas Project. Each plant has two reactors, and together they provide about 10% of the state’s electricity. So when we see this, we might understand the crazy presentation on AI and the setting of available energy. So when I gave my feelings on the three reactors, we see a much larger need, but is that a given? I know that I can be wrong, even if I am proven right months later. Causality does not mean proven effect, that requires a whole different setting of statistics and proof leading to this.

So feel free to doubt me, but there are the stories and there are the newscasts and the data that nuclear reactors require time is pretty much a given. So feel free to doubt it all, I don’t mind. Just consider the setting that the Data centers require energy and who do you want that energy to get? Your fridge and microwave or an AI data center whilst we know that AI isn’t real. I leave it up to you.

Have a great day and feel free to look around you. The data is all around us all.

The jab from the left

That is the setting I was contemplating today. It all started with the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62488144) where I saw ‘Elon Musk sells $6.9bn of Tesla shares as Twitter lawsuit looms’ it was at that moment I was contemplating a larger jab from the left. Consider that I reckon that one of my IP will bring in half a billion a month. What if I offer that to Elon Musk? It is not his field, but that has never stopped him before. What if I was the on giving him optionally surpassing 5 billion a year (not in the first year) for some time to come? My way of giving the media the finger, as well as some tech places. We still see the BS from media ignoring the Fake Twitter accounts, we see some BS approach like ‘she cried, she cried louder and we wonder what happens’, well if it helps Elon Musk, I am game. There is also the augmented reality IP, as such there might be another stage where Elon Musk gets the visibility in 116,000 malls. I think it is a good day to give the finger to hypocrisy and the media with there digital dollars? They can watch from the stage as they become more and more redundant. Hmmm, the idea has merit, and if I can set the stage for places like the Line to show it all first we will see all these tech companies come up with “We are working on something much better” yes, like the virgin who is in denial that she was pregnant, a toilet seat must have done it. Well, two can play at that game and I have the IP to make it happen, as such I see a much larger option to have a go at these hypocrites. 35 years of frustration watching wankers and weaklings hide behind fake it until you make it, hide behind their bullet points, like it was the ammunition that could not miss sales targets. There is something totally satisfying watching them cry like the little chihuahua’s they actually are. Will it happen? I have no idea, I think not, I doubt Elon Musk even knows about this blog and he has more pressing concerns at present, but the idea to show the media that we have had enough of the BS they spout by giving billions in revenue to the man they hate, and for that reason only will upset big-tech in a way they have never seen before.

There is nothing like the sight of a hungry glutton being denied their next meal to see chaos truly explode and that is what would happen. Never mind the Microsoft losers, places like Amazon and Google will take notice, for them having to acknowledge Elon Musk as their equal in mobiles, cars, battery technology AND gaming. That will have a much larger impact and the media will seek all kinds of shelter, crying that their was no place in their publication, crying that they never hd the know how, that it is all the right of publications to chose what to write about and if I can drive the dagger home with a few issues on the EEA and their ignored reports, so much the better.

So whilst the BBC is not doing anything wrong with “After news of the share sale was made public Mr Musk responded to a tweet asking whether he had finished selling Tesla shares with “yes”, adding that he needed the money in case he was forced to buy Twitter and was unable to secure some of the funding for the deal.” Some might realise that the recent ‘confession’ that Twitter is deleting a million accounts a day and that adds up to a lot more than some are comfortable with. There is a larger station and I feel it is not the worst idea to scorch the media with a flamethrower (I had run out of daisies).

The jab from the left is one the media is too often not ready for, they will ‘debate’ that there are compromises, all whilst we know that compromise politics is the most corrupt of all politics. And it is time that the proper people get the proper acknowledgement and we can get there by denying the other players their slice of cake. I’ll make it even more extreme. There is at present nothing stopping me to make it all public domain, and when the lists go public on September 30th that might very well happen. All it will take is 1-3 clever people who can look beyond the rim of their coffee cup (something most politicians have not been able to do for some time). Clever people on 4chan could end up with a treasure trove of IP on several grounds (apart from melting down Iranian and Russian nuclear reactors), that one I left somewhere else, I am not THAT irresponsible. And the idea I had came from a snow-globe, but I already wrote about that.

Just in light of the setting of these days a solution for Iranian arrogance, through a snow-globe ending their nuclear reactors. How could I ever pass up on that? I reckon that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would owe me too and that is not the worst setting to be in, to be owed a large favour from the richest nation in the world. All that because the media would not do their jobs, how is that for freedom of the press and freedom of expression? I am using my freedom of expression the way I can, and they use the freedom of the press to get digital clicks through flaming. I reckon I am in a better position, but that is merely my view on the matter and lets face it, they could call it delusional. I wonder what they will call it AFTER I am proven correct? I reckon it will be stated that this was too complex an issue for people with a university degree in journalism.

In the end, I still get my money, or my share and I am willing to make amends to that setting, the reward of screwing over the media will be that big a deal for me to cut a few corners leaving me with millions less. Or I still end with the amount of zero, the amount I always expected to end with when it all becomes public domain. I wonder, if I do this, will it be public domain, or pubic domain? Not the weirdest question to get, although, pretty extreme for a Wednesday.

Such is life!

The NSS 2014 danger

The Nuclear Security Summit 2014 is at an end. The circus of 53 delegation members, the security forces and other parties are leaving or have left the Netherlands. This summit needs to exist; there is no doubt about it. As long as the powers that be discuss and negotiate on these matters, the better the chance that the chance of escalations and extreme consequences remain at an all-time low. This is a basic pragmatic truth.
I do however worry about one aspect. An aspect I do not completely agree with, but an aspect that has long reaching consequences and as such the next generation will get additional responsibilities in regards to cleaning, aside from the economic mess that most leaders are leaving the next generation.
The issue I have is one that will have a long term impact, much longer than the three generations who are about to inherit the current economic debt, especially in Japan, America, France, Italy, Spain and Greece.
What is the issue? The issue us that there is a strong voice and movement to steer away from highly enriched Uranium (20%-85%) and use low enriched Uranium (less than 20%). The logic given is to make sure that the chance of extreme elements getting their hands on weapons grade Uranium becomes even lower. That part makes perfect sense, yet the danger that was, is now getting a lot larger on two fronts, it is simple and basic logic.

1. To get the same amount of energy, a nuclear reactor will have to use between 150% and 325% nuclear fuel to get the same amount of energy. You can find some basic knowledge at http://world-nuclear.org/Nuclear-Basics/How-does-a-nuclear-reactor-make-electricity-/. If for example one rod of highly enriched Uranium gives us one week of power, then we need a lot more rods of low enriched Uranium, but we still will not get the same amount of energy over that time, so the rods would need replacement sooner. No matter how the reactor is replaced or upgraded, the reactor ends up with less steam for electricity.
This part can be shown using a simple electric stove. Have two identical pots of water, set one stove to high and one to medium. You will see that it simply takes longer to get the medium plate with water boiling. Now that part is not the issue, waiting a little longer is not the big thing, when the water starts to boil, switch both off and now see how quickly the water of the medium plate goes off the boil and the water will soon thereafter no longer boils, which means no more steam for electricity.
The test is simple and basic and several factors are cast aside, but the foundation should come across, reactors will need more rods, which mean that the stockpiles of depleted Uranium would grow in excess of 250%, which is part of the first big issue, because as we can read at http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/uranium-and-depleted-uranium/ that the half-life of Depleted Uranium (DU) goes into the centuries, which gives us the nasty side effect that we are growing the stockpile faster and faster and the required space will increase, using spaces that allows for nothing near it for hundreds of generations.
2. The extreme element. Yes, we all agree that the idea of any extremist getting its hands on highly enriched Uranium is truly the stuff of nightmares. Yet, this is not the biggest danger. By many parties in several fields (law enforcement and intelligence) there is a clear and present fear that extremists will get their hands on depleted Uranium and as such will create a dirty bomb with conventional means and mix in depleted Uranium for good measure. That scary effect will not just strike fear in the people. It creates a simple way to make people vacate complete zip codes in the blink of an eye. Now consider that the changes will create up to three times as much DU. This gives us more need of storage, and like with every shipping, the more you ship, the larger the danger becomes that one package ‘falls’ of a truck and into the wrong hands.
So these are the two issues I have. I am not against the banning of Highly Enriched Uranium, but do the people outside the NSS circle realise the consequences of such a decision? Of course all this will come with a massive amount of additional costs, which will again drive power prices up as it is a related cost.
The big danger related to all this is that there is no real solution. Those naive enough to state ban all nuclear power should realise that the pollution and the price of creating energy will spike on both counts. I am not against those big propellers in the sea or on land, because it is clean energy and anyone complaining about the view better take a nice look at the alternative. Those people will not volunteer to live next to a nuclear plant either. The propeller might not offer the greatest view, but in many area’s it does work getting them clean energy. However, I am digressing from the topic.
The change does introduce another danger. The short term security we might get through this is replaced with the long term dangers that we and several next generations will deal with. the danger is that too many people will ignore the issues, just like the national debts many faced and now all are complaining about the cut backs we are all dealing with, the Nuclear stockpile will grow slowly and we will not see or worry about the space needed, but when space is gone, it will be gone forever for many generations.
Nuclear power places us between a rock and an irradiated hard place. We are still no closer to truly have an alternative that really works at present and most nations no longer have the budgets to make any solid change in this regard for the near future. I like the wind alternative, yet I have never been against Nuclear power. Living in Sweden, seeing the benefit of the Swedish power supplier Vattenfal (in my wallet) is reason for this. The quote “Sweden’s primary energy mix is now 65 percent zero-carbon and composed of a blend of hydropower, nuclear power, and biomass, with almost no coal” found at ‘the breakthrough’, shows that nuclear power is an essential part for many nations if they want to decrease their carbon footprint. Sweden might have had the benefit of biomass and hydropower, but many nations do not, which makes them stronger dependent on other solutions. Wind and solar offer a little relief, but without nuclear power they will not get there, that is the part many activists forget about.
So the NSS had made a call, it is a hard one, but is it the right one? There are a few unknown elements, so I cannot tell. Yet, I do believe that short term solution is too dangerous against long term grief, but there I must also caution myself, how much long term grief will we face?
Consider that the US alone has stored 700,000 metric tons of DU (at http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq16.cfm), in addition (at http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/faq/mgmt/faq27.cfm) we see what is required and some insight of the costs involved, when some nations switch (some had already switched) and the amount triples, how will the costs add up then, more important, where will we find the space?

So here we see the danger of the NSS decision, but is it really a dangerous one?

Tag Archives: nuclear reactor

Walking back needs

The jab from the left

The NSS 2014 danger

Recent Posts

Archives