Top all-time · #7529
B
bravenewclimate.com
Personal blog · bravenewclimate.comscienceeconomics
bravenewclimate.com is a personal blog at bravenewclimate.com about science and economics. Since 2008, 11 different Hacker News readers have linked it 20 times. No feed was found, so read it on the site itself.
No feed foundVisit the blog
20mentions?
11HN people?
2008–2018first – last linked?
Too few sampled comments (10) to say how often HN recommends it.?
Why HN links it
HN readers link this climate and energy blog as a source on nuclear power, renewables, energy storage and the Japan reactor crisis. Commenters cite its posts as supporting references for their own points.
Summarised by Claude from a sample of 10 HN comments that link here. Each comment is marked recommending, critical or neutral (citing without judging); how this works.
Most-linked posts?
- /2011/03/12/japan-nuclear-earthquake/2 people · 2 mentions · first linked 2011-03-13
What Hacker News says?
This is a very well-written article. In the end, the author provides a nice collection of links to usable resources. If you want to stay informed, please forget the usual media outlets and consult the following websites: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Battle_to_stabilise_ear... http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/12/japan-nuclear-earthqua... http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/03/11/media-updates-on-nuclea...
Comment linking /2011/03/12/japan-nuclear-earthquake/
on “Why I am not worried about Japan’s nuclear reactors”Submitted Fukushima Nuclear Accident – a simple and accurate explanation as a story · 2 points
HN discussionSeveral points here: 1. Most waste from nuclear plants is contained, unlike coal/gas. 2. The amount of the waste itself is miniscule, the amount of uranium needed to produce all the energy you will ever use throught your time on this planet will fit in a can of coke [1] - for comparison - as shown for example in [2], it would take 20 tonnes of coal pulverized into atmosphere to get the same amount of energy. 3. Bein…
Comment linking /2010/04/22/ifr-fad-4/
on “Solar Surpasses Gas and Wind as Biggest Source of New U.S. Power”Submitted Can we build nuclear power plants fast enough to meet the 2060 target? as a story · 1 points
HN discussionSee my reference from my first comment http://bravenewclimate.com/?s=TCASE The Thinking Critically About Sustainable Energy series from bravenewclimate.com - TCASE 4 [1] in particular. It references this [2] document form The University of Sydney for wind, and this one [3] for solar. TCASE 5 [4] looks wave power, and TCASE 7 [5] investigates scaling up Andasol 1 to baseload. I also recommend reading the comments sec…
Comment linking /2009/12/06/tcase7/
on “Solar plant has generated “supercritical” steam”Why are people down-voting this comment? Is being correct not allowed? In Australia it is often not sunny for days on end, also it is often not windy for days on end, over huge areas of land - you know, like, bigger than a lot of European countries. For wind and solar to be economically competitive with coal / gas / nuclear they have to be at price parity including 24+hrs storage. This isn't going to happen any time…
Comment linking /?s=TCASE
on “Solar plant has generated “supercritical” steam”Keep in mind those two solutions are on opposite sides of the world. I found this [1], which gives the projected Snowy Mountain 2.0 proposal in Australia at $250/kWh (AUD, presumably). Regardless, I don't disagree that pumped hydro can still a viable choice in some places when it comes to large scale, I think South Australia made the best choice going with battery storage, even if driven from mostly political reason…
Comment linking /2010/04/05/pumped-hydro-system-cost/
on “Cost goals met, the DoE is moving on to address grid reliability in solar”Yep, and look at the graphs. Look at the yearly graph at the bottom, nuclear output averages 6.0 - 7.0GW, wind output averages about 2.0 - 2.5GW over a 12 month period, for about the same nameplate capacity (installed nameplate capacity: Wind 8GW; Nuclear 12GW - close enough to support the following argument). This means we have to overbuild wind capacity by a factor of about 3 to 4 in order to match nuclear / coal…
Comment linking /2009/10/18/tcase4/
on “Vanadium: The metal that may soon be powering your neighbourhood”- nl · 2011-05-17
So an accident which doesn't harm human life, doesn't damage any property not belonging to the power company, and doesn't do any lasting or even long lived damage to the environment, does not rise to the level of 'huge disaster' in my opinion. I disagree. I think the second-worse nuclear disaster in history is a huge disaster, especially since it looks like it will leave a large area uninhabitable. Even by the INES…
Comment linking /2011/03/12/japan-nuclear-earthquake/
on “Fukushima Reactor 1 melted down, 2 and 3 may have too” Sure, the spot price -that is: the wholesale price- for electricity in EU and AU might be negative, but that doesn't mean the end user pays less. Anecdote: the data centre I used to work in had a fixed kWh price for bulk electricity consumption. As far as I'm aware electricity retailers, at least in Australia, don't adjust their retail and bulk rates in accordance with the spot price. The retailers are about making…
Comment linking /?s=tcase
on “US Has More Solar Workers Than Coal Miners”TWR is NOT clean energy. http://bravenewclimate.com/2010/09/22/twr-vs-ifr/
Comment linking /2010/09/22/twr-vs-ifr/
on “We Need Clean-Energy Innovation, and Lots of It”Argonne National Laboratory tested a cohabited breeder called the Integral Fast Reactor. The reprocessing would happen on-site, using a process similar to electrolysis which never separates plutonium from the other transuranics. The material would never be in a form usable for bombs, and making it bomb-ready would be more difficult than just enriching uranium. But the fast neutrons in the reactor would easily burn u…
Comment linking /integral-fast-reactor-ifr-nuclear-power/
on “New nuclear fuel source would power human race until 5000AD”That's good news, but no matter how cheap it is, solar only works when the sun shines. The real impediment to a solar/wind economy is energy storage, which is still very expensive and hard to scale. A good post that runs the numbers and conveys the scale of the problem is here: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-bat... And another that takes a close look at wind is here: http://bravenewclimate.…
Comment linking /2011/10/29/gws-sg-es/
on “Moore's law for Solar Energy?”Some of Professor Plimer's arguments have been countered elsewhere previously. Please see http://bravenewclimate.com/2008/09/01/spot-the-recycled-deni... More generally, I would offer http://www.realclimate.org as a blog which offers excellent scientific discussion of climate change.
Comment linking /2008/09/01/spot-the-recycled-denial-iii-%E2%80%93-prof-ian-plimer/
on “Beware the church of climate alarm”http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/11/03/wws-2030-critique/ http://energyfromthorium.com/2008/12/11/a-review-of-mark-z-j... http://atomicinsights.blogspot.com/2009/11/food-for-critical...
Comment linking /2009/11/03/wws-2030-critique/
on “Alternative energy can power the world in 20-40 years”- nl · 2011-03-18
so.. It needs to understand that "jarin" is the username on a website called news.ycombinator.com, which allows comments, and these comments are different to the stories posted on the site. But of course "Obama's latest comment on CBS news" means the president's comments on the CBS TV channel's news service. An equally obviously "Brook's latest comment on Fukushima" would refer to a blog post by Barry Brooks on the…
Comment linking /
on “The Future of Search Can Be Found in Dungeon”
