Russia and China to Build a Nuclear Plant on the Moon.  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 02:21:13 am
content: Weeeeeell....i'm bit sceptical to say the least but is it viable? a 40kW unit is what the aim is.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 02:35:45 am
content: They should put a bunch of wind turbines over there instead.

author: Andy Chee
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:05:51 am
content: I would've thought solar panels were the obvious choice on the moon, though given the roughly 14 day/14 night cycle, you'd need sufficient battery capacity to sustain operations during the night.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:07:47 am
content: even if they sucseed it will never be safe as the earth loop impedance is gonna be massive

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:08:13 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 07, 2024, 02:35:45 amNot so fast to recommend "sustainable" solutions from WEF, the thorium flourid molten salt reactor might work.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:14:32 am
content: Quote from: Andy Chee on March 07, 2024, 03:05:51 amOnly if they build solar roads on the moon.

author: shadow.dark
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:15:23 am
content: It's one thing to have the ability to say it, it's another to have the ability to do it. Chinese officials are good at making PPTs, so let's wait until they actually come up with something, shall we?"talk is cheap show me the hardware "

author: LaserSteve
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:36:10 am
content: Russia has a long history of liquid metal cooled reactors in space. A few of them have failed, too.Steve

author: TopQuark
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:14:02 am
content: https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/russia-heads-back-to-the-moon-with-luna-25/https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/russia-seems-to-have-lost-contact-with-its-first-lunar-probe-in-half-a-century/I mean Russia seems to be struggling with landing anything on the lunar surface for the past half a century, maybe they should stick to the basics before thinking about setting up a nuclear power station on the moon.

author: Circlotron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:14:35 am
content: World's (or moon's) first tofu dregs nuclear reactor. I can't wait. At least it will be a safe distance away.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:27:48 am
content: Doesn't seem to be an enormous scale up of something they have done multiple times already.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US-AThe real difference here is Western safety standards vs Soviet/Russian. If you are willing to have a few accidents here and there it is much easier to design and build.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 06:33:44 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 07, 2024, 03:14:32 amwhat about a solar belt? one half would always had light

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 08:26:54 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 07, 2024, 04:27:48 amI think its that we learned our lesson early. The scientists that build the atomic bomb for WO2 Japan were crazy cowboys, jumping into a semi-live reactor pool to fix some broken plumbing iirc. And the research lab they worked in had plenty of crazy accidents with "the demon core", with 2 plates inducing runaway fission/critical mass held apart with just a screwdriver. Then the US military also operated some portable/small reactors with sketchy stuff like manual control rods that would get stuck, but if you pull them out too hard the reactor will explode and staple you to the roof with said rods. Oh, and what about you guys stand over there in that field (desert), then we'll have an atomic bomb explode on top of your head just to see what happens (luckily, not all that much).Its just that the west have come to respect nuclear stuff a lot more over the years.. but in Russia, they treat liabilities as opportunities, they have plenty of rugs to sweep it under (I heard they put them on walls too, is that the reason?).

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 09:44:09 am
content: Quote from: MT on March 07, 2024, 02:21:13 amNuclear power plant on the Moon? Don't know if viable, but wasn't the Moon already taken?Iron Sky Official Trailer #2Rotten Tomatoes

author: jonovid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 11:23:29 am
content: what about the coolant?but the obvious question is who is saying this?is this American propaganda by Firstpost?Firstpost is an Indian news website owned by Reliance Industries, which also runs CNN-News18 and CNBC TV18.Reliance Industries Limited is a Fortune 500 company and the largest private sector corporation in India.

author: Andy Chee
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 11:41:21 am
content: Quote from: jonovid on March 07, 2024, 11:23:29 amNope. Actually sounds like Russian propaganda more than anything.https://www.dw.com/en/russia-china-float-idea-of-building-nuclear-plant-on-moon/a-68448940

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 03:13:55 pm
content: Maybe they should put a man on the moon first. And return it. Not because that's easy but because it's hard or whatever.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:10:57 pm
content: NASA has been working on small nuclear reactors to power things like spacecraft and Moon/Mars bases for a while now. They have had successful test projects, so it's probably doable.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:43:44 pm
content: It is certainly doable. My previous comment wasn't an endorsement of western safety standards. In the west we are trending towards finding that a one in a million chance of someone getting a hangnail is unacceptable. People in the US are currently going crazy over a vacuum thermos that has a lead seal that is not externally accessible, and claiming a billion dollars of emotional damage from being in the airplane that lost a window.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:51:37 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 07, 2024, 04:43:44 pmIm fine with fining Boeing a billion dollars for the series of blunders they have been doing in the past few years.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 04:52:31 pm
content: Lol. Russia should first take a crash course in landing probes on the Moon without crashing them.https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/20/science/russia-moon-space-crash.html

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 07:35:28 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on March 07, 2024, 04:51:37 pmPersonally, I would rather see the billion dollars spent on fixing the problems rather than enriching lawyers and soothing the bruised psyches of people who suffered no real damage, but whatever floats your boat.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 08:13:03 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on March 07, 2024, 04:51:37 pmBoeing will pass the costs to airlines, which will then pass them on to consumers. If Boeing can't make airlines foot the bill for the extra costs, taxpayers will have to bail out the "too large to fail" Boeing, leading to higher inflation and everyone paying the price. Are there any winners in this mess? You bet - litigation lawyers.

author: AndyBeez
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2024, 11:50:44 pm
content: Once the reactor core is up and running, moon base moscow is going to need a power grid. So that's another 200 tonne of copper cable to soft land somewhere in the sea of catastrophe. Astronauts and other space tourists, pack your USB travel battery.

author: Infraviolet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 12:39:09 am
content: What a thoroughly deceptive preview image on the video, huge powerplant with cooling towers...* 40KW isn't a powerplant, it's less than a submarine style reactor, a lot less I think. But 40kW is useful for a manned lunar base or that sort of thing.*also absurd, water on the moon is far too valuable a resource to jettison as a cooling methodIt's a good idea, but I doubt Russia and China could trust each other enough to put any real investment in to building one.It would be nice if the western nations got off their backsides and did some of this, because that sort of nuclear power in space, with some further modifications, is the only way we're ever going to be able to get men to mars, or to get properly big and capable robotic lander missions to the moons of the gas giants.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 01:01:34 am
content: Quote from: Andy Chee on March 07, 2024, 03:05:51 amThe moon doesn't rotate, so no night or day.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 01:02:24 am
content: Fortunately I just watched XKCD video about nuclear submarines in space.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 01:08:33 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on March 08, 2024, 01:01:34 amThe Moon does in fact rotate in sync with its orbit around the Earth, resulting in a day on the Moon lasting about 29 Earth days.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 01:20:32 am
content: What about a heat exchange power plant of some sort? In full sunshine, surface reach +127°C for 13,5 days. Then -173°C inside a crater for 13,5 days. One big azz peltier plate?

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 02:03:20 am
content: 9 years ago Kirk said Chinese spends hundreds of millions of USD into Thorium molten salt reactors, vastly in excess to what west put into the research, perhaps a clue they have something.https://youtu.be/xBmk7t5K35A?t=2720Kirk on anti nuclear everything green, save the planet, no CO2 , eat bugz, be happy people.https://youtu.be/xBmk7t5K35A?t=3255

author: Circlotron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 02:21:13 am
content: Quote from: MT on March 08, 2024, 01:20:32 amOr Stirling engine.

author: Andy Chee
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 04:55:26 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on March 08, 2024, 01:01:34 amYou're correct, the moon does not rotate, hence we see the same side of the moon from earth.However you're also incorrect, the moon does indeed experience night and day.https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Lunation_animation_November_2009.gifhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_day

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 12:52:17 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 07, 2024, 07:35:28 pmThe problem is likely their DEI hiring policy, and you just have to hit them again and again hard until they fold or go out of business.Quote from: vad on March 07, 2024, 08:13:03 pmThey work with minimum margins and airlines will just switch to Airbus if that occurs regularly. It's already a huge blunder for them as well.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 01:43:41 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on March 08, 2024, 12:52:17 pmYes, it is well known that both Philip M. Condit and Jim McNerney were only hired as CEOs because Boeing adopted McDonnell Douglas' DEI policy after the merger. /s

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 07:57:50 pm
content: Quote from: MT on March 08, 2024, 01:20:32 amHow about we stop screwing up billions of people on Earth before building power plants on the moon? And I'm not a hippie either.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 09:10:07 pm
content: Can you even build anything on a celestial body, as that would imply you claim property rights to a part of the celestial body, and there are international treaties saying celestial bodies cant be anyone's property.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 09:21:15 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on March 08, 2024, 09:10:07 pmIt's a bit complex:https://phys.org/news/2024-02-moon.html

author: shapirus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 09:35:54 pm
content: Quote from: Circlotron on March 07, 2024, 04:14:35 amIfit manages to make it past the orbit.

author: Njk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2024, 09:44:39 pm
content: The Moon nuclear facility is excellent plan indeed. Not sure about China, but in Russia the nuclear lobby is very strong and powerful. As usual, that'll be a government initiative and the things will be done in not the most efficient way. But the other governments will be forced to build similar installations there out of competition, perhaps in more creative ways. Consider the latest trend, a small modular reactorshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor. The smaller the better so more units can be sold. The sweet dream of that guys is to plant their toys under each kindergarten providing us with clean, safe and reliable energy source. If that guys will be provided with the opportunity to pursue their goals elsewhere (e.g. on the Moon) that'll be effectively good for all.I'm not sure we need more energy. Every living thing demonstrates the capability to exist with available energy sources. The problem is definitely not on the supply side. More energy often creates more problems. E.g., in Alaska and some places in Nothern California, it's close to misdemeanor to dump the food leftovers to outside garbage buckets, because of the bears. The bears are happy with the extra food, so they're growing in numbers making the situation worse. It's not the only example. The UHD IV, the "big battery for everyone" scam, etc., etc.So if all those with inflated ambitions and raised expectations will migrate to the Moon (taking their breed with them) many will be happy just by not seeing them here. Although Mars seems a better crusade target because it's more far away so more chances all the conquistadors will die off there and never be back. By the way, there must be a plenty of gold.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 05:33:00 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 08, 2024, 07:57:50 pmIm trying to come up with serious solutions to solve a serious problem for billions of starving people on earth , your windmill and solar road solutions in space is not very helpful!

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 05:46:43 am
content: Quote from: Njk on March 08, 2024, 09:44:39 pmI doubt that our kindergarten owners are willing to put a miniature Chernobyl under their facilities, and I also doubt that local codes would allow that either. You know, we do not have comrade Putin to command what kindergarten should do in their sweet dreams.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 05:51:22 am
content: Quote from: MT on March 09, 2024, 05:33:00 amThey're not very helpful on Earth either, but that doesn't stop us.

author: Andy Chee
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 05:57:27 am
content: Quote from: MT on March 09, 2024, 05:33:00 amA human colony on Antarctica would be a better solution than a human colony on the Moon.

author: snarkysparky
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 04:19:31 pm
content: Why?

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2024, 04:43:00 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 09, 2024, 05:51:22 amExactly.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2024, 10:44:55 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 09, 2024, 05:51:22 amSolar road would probably work quite well on the moon, considering the 1/6th weight of everything, no dust because no wind, and the general lack of cars (3 in total).

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2024, 12:45:05 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on March 08, 2024, 01:01:34 amOf course the moon rotates. Once a month.Thedark side of the moonis a music album, not any description of reality.

author: bitwelder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2024, 08:12:30 am
content: Hey, nobody remembers what happened on September 13th, 1999?

author: Artz
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 06:16:19 am
content: When China figures out how to land something on the moon in a few decades, russian scientists will just let the reactor core overheat and irradiate half the moon.

author: strawberry
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 09:45:27 am
content: one nuclear reactor is leaving solar systemhigh power reactor cooling in space will be biggest challenge because there is no way to dissipate excess heatISS use ammonia evaporator with ~70kW cooling capacity(i think)most feasible colony options Total Recall

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 11:23:04 am
content: Quote from: soldar on March 11, 2024, 12:45:05 amThe moondidhave a "dark side", but stopped having one on October 7th 1959.Hint: Africa used to be called "The Dark Contininent", and it wasn't because of the melatonin in the inhabitants' skin

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 12:35:54 pm
content: Building nuclear power stations on the moon is probably not an issue that needs solving until we have a pretty decent sized base up there, or we want to start doing some actual mining/manufacturing up there.Until then solar + RTGs make more sense.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 08:24:28 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on April 25, 2024, 11:23:04 amMust have been a rough day.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 09:20:23 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 25, 2024, 08:24:28 pmSo bad it was front page news around the world. Scared the USA witless.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2024, 11:35:40 pm
content: Quote from: soldar on March 11, 2024, 12:45:05 amWhich was what I meant to convey, but stuffed it up.I was thinking about how the moon presents the same side to us, & that there was always some part of the moon lit by the sun.I neglected the fact that we don't seeallof the same side, all of the time.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 04:51:01 am
content: this sounds like the plot of 'star wreck'

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 05:26:51 am
content: Build a nuclear reactor on the moon?Well, let's see, Russia can't build a tank past WWII models that doesn't go "Pop Goes the Wiesel, er the Turret that is" when struck by almost anything larger than a 30 caliber (7.62mm¹ for you metric types) bullet. Actually their WWII models do that too.And China has three aircraft carriers but no viable aircraft to use with them. Oh, and have you ever purchased anything from Ali Express? One month delivery and their electronic parts fall apart if soldered for a second time.And those wonder houses of technology are going to build a nuclear reactor on the moon? I bet it will be a small one. And I wouldn't be surprised if it melts down after a year or two. If it takes even that long.And it's not a lack of brain power. They have some excellent scientists and engineers. It's the political bosses who are so corrupt that everything gets stolen or "misdirected".Note 1: I have to admire the European nations which have changed their military rifles to a metric caliber. Lets see, 30 caliper = 0.300 INCHES = 25.4 mm/inch X 0.300" = 7.62mm. Viola, it's metric! That's it, a mathematically exact conversion. No decimal places past the "2", just zeros to infinity. Boy was that ever so,so smart of them. No more old-fashioned units of measure there.

author: Andy Chee
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 06:19:00 am
content: Quote from: strawberry on April 25, 2024, 09:45:27 amSure there is. The same way the sun sends its heat to earth. Radiation.Heat can transfer in four ways; phase change, conduction, convection, and radiation.Whether a high powered nuclear reactor can be cooled via radiation alone, now that's an engineering challenge.

author: Coordonnée_chromatique
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 09:00:03 am
content: Quote from: Andy Chee on April 26, 2024, 06:19:00 amHello, this is an idot question but, if you radiated energy hits nothing there is no heat transfer ?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 09:13:59 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on April 25, 2024, 11:35:40 pmCorrect. We seemore than 50%of the lunar surface.Since the 1850s this has been used to show remarkable stereoscopic views of the moon, originally for Brewster viewers. Get out your red-blue anaglyphs, and see the football

author: strawberry
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 12:37:03 pm
content: vacuum tubes can radiate some IR ~20W heat but it is not enough to radiate more power per volumeneed direct anode cooling heatsink fins or water cooling for power TX tube >100Wprobably reactor will melt if sun shines effectively onto such IR radiator

author: dcbrown73
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 05:26:11 pm
content: So, People are I believe already building Thorium-based molten salt reactors that basically are manufactured in what amounts to a shipping container. Some people think they can be the future of nuclear reactors for all. Each house subdivision has it's own energy supply. Instead of street side transformers, you have street side Thorium-based molten salt reactor powering the neighborhood. That could eliminate the need for electrical grids and remove all the risk that they pause to greater communities.So, why build one if you could just deliver one already built?Obviously, I'm no nuclear scientist, but if this is the future. Why would you ever attempt to build a reactor on the moon? Well, unless it's weight or something else makes it not practical to deliver / use. Melt down shouldn't be a problem since molten salt reactors operate in a meltdown state!

author: dcbrown73
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 05:29:20 pm
content: Quote from: strawberry on April 26, 2024, 12:37:03 pmA heat shield would fix that. The James Webb Telescope has a heat shield. It's -452F (-269C) in the shade and 752F (400C) on the hot side that faces the Sun.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 05:48:01 pm
content: Quote from: dcbrown73 on April 26, 2024, 05:29:20 pmThe Webb heat shield benefits from being a long ways from anything else, so the cold side effectively sees the cold sky everywhere. A shield over a reactor on the lunar surface would stabilize to the temperature of the lunar surface, which would in turn be set by thermal conduction from the subsurface layers. Somewhere around 300K.But in any case radiating the heat from a reactor is just an engineering problem. A heat pump can raise the hot side temperature above any local temperature and radiate the heat away. Adds weight and complexity and reduces net power available, but doesn't violate any physical laws.

author: strawberry
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 06:11:02 pm
content: dont know some say that earth could be overheated by sun if didnt radiate excess heat to spaceenergy conservation lawmaybe some fraction converts into kinetic energy

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 06:32:51 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on April 26, 2024, 09:13:59 amIt worked! 👍

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2024, 07:02:00 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on April 26, 2024, 06:32:51 pmFun, isn't it. APOD has stereo anaglyphs infrequently, so I keep my anaglyph specs handy. A few examples:https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap221217.htmlhttps://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap240117.htmlhttps://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap211023.htmlThat last one is a good example of why stereo photos can be better than flattie photos.But then I've been taking stereo pictures for 40 years, and have a pleasant collection of vintage glass stereoscopic slides.https://vintagestereoscopicglassslides.wordpress.com/

author: GigaJoe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2024, 07:11:55 pm
content: Have some fun ...A cooling dome on the image at the first post .... in the vacuum ... is everything all right, I guess so ...Then ... each and every nuclear station on earth , fall under basic Carnot Cycle , where active body , transfer energy from hot side to the cold side, release energy, that transformed, and then cool down even more for efficiency, by water or air cooling such as dome .... That Carnot Cycle give you about 30-40% efficiency , the rest dissipated in a thin air. so - 1000 kW electrical nuclear unit about 4200 kW Thermal power, and 3000 kW dissipating as a wasteSpace reactors - same principles, atoms divided , emits energy and absorb by active body, usually liquid metal, then a difference, instead steam turbine, a thermoelectric generator. due to not much temperature different , overall efficiency quite mediocre ... for 1000W thermal power probably 70W electrical .... the rest 900+ watts need to dissipate , usually by emitters, due to vacuum ...technically gases can be used to spin turbines in a space, Problem A- gas will be lost , need replenish, B- low efficiency due to gas masses, C- heavy spinning turbine not for a long time. D - everything sealed as part A. E- deal with hot gases , that a headache, metals absorb it and changing internal structure , etc ...if ... thermoelectric .... then 40kW electrical transfer to 500 kW thermal , and rather heat the core of the moon , I have no clue how to dissipate it ...I think It great, and absolutely doable project, with minimal investment (pen and paper don't cost much), with very solid result ...

author: tatel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2024, 09:39:59 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on March 07, 2024, 04:43:44 pmYeah, after Fukushima all that hype about western secure designs is now clearly understood as BS, one only needs just a functional brain. But, hey, we are winning 3 to 1! Not to mention TMI and those "incidents" while developing the thing because then our advantage would be mostly against de Olympic sport ideals...

author: soldar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2024, 11:17:08 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on April 25, 2024, 11:35:40 pmThe far side of the moon or the occult side of the moon, as opposed to the near side of the moon or the visible side of the moon.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2024, 11:28:31 pm
content: Well, conflating "non-visible" with "dark" was a case of ostrich policy."There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2024, 12:28:37 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on April 28, 2024, 11:28:31 pmWords change their meaning over time.A couple of centuries "dark" was often used to mean "hidden" or "unknown". Thus the "Dark Arts" were hidden/secret sorcery/rituals..It is less than 200 years since the central regions of Africa became known to Europeans (e.g. the source(s) of the Nile, Congo), so it was quite reasonable to think of Africa as being the unknown/hidden/Dark continent.Similarly, the moon did have an unknown/dark side until October 7th 1959. On that day Luna 3 returned photographs of the far side, and it ceased to be the Dark Side of the moon.

author: GigaJoe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2024, 06:41:58 am
content: Thorium-based molten salt reactors that basically are manufactured in what amounts to a shipping container.KInda ... To elaborate it .... Imagine 1 huge factory building 1000 cars per day . Or same quantity builds by 1000 small auto shops. guess which one would be much cheaper.To make project financially viable at a current state, a nuclear plant should be at least 4-6 Mega watt operational, with lifespan around 20-30 years. that translated around 1 Mw per unit.Thorium reactors had a significant problems to scale at reasonable thermal power 3-4 Mwatt , due to difficulties to manage heat flow, evenly , and reactivity of nitrate salt + radiation, corrosion, and quite short lifespan of overall unit due to all this factors simply did cancel any projects somewhere 70-s ..Sealed reactors , or modular reactors .... similar stuff that in use on submarines ; 3 - problems ... Currently prohibited cost ; What to do if shit happens ; what to do when it depleted \ discharged or became non working - in volumes and follow up process ...Btw ... compare price for NE5532 in ceramic , and same as space grade , radiation hardener chip ... yep .... Then multiply on amount, pressure sensors, temperature sensors, flow sensor , alpha beta gamma radiation sensors , tensor sensors , position sensors and other kinda sensors just for that sealed reactor .....