Discussion:
AMAZING Anti-Smoking Commercial
(too old to reply)
El Castor
2018-01-11 19:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
islander
2018-01-11 22:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
El Castor
2018-01-12 03:18:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 04:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
islander
2018-01-12 16:13:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.

As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-12 18:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
Heavens to Betsy, there goes the neighborhood!
Post by islander
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
I think there's a company in Fukushima that will sell parts for
nuclear power plants, cheap. There's a place in White Russia
too, though it's still a suicide mission to go anywhere near there
to there to gather them up. You could pick up fuel for the
reactors just by filtering the ocean water around Fukushima.
El Castor
2018-01-12 20:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
islander
2018-01-13 01:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.

TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
El Castor
2018-01-13 19:13:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
Josh Rosenbluth
2018-01-14 03:53:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
I am pleasantly surprised by our neo-socialist friend Jeff.
El Castor
2018-01-14 09:36:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 19:53:39 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
I am pleasantly surprised by our neo-socialist friend Jeff.
Now, now, just because I am not afraid to think for myself, no need to
be rude and call me names!
islander
2018-01-14 16:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
The Navy has certainly demonstrated that a standard design can be
developed and implemented with a nearly perfect safety record. You are
not the only conservative who has suggested that to me.

Most if not all of the nuclear plant disasters were caused by or made
worse by really careless mistakes (putting the backup generators in the
basement of the plants in Fukushima where they would be vulnerable to
flooding for example). Nuclear power would be much more acceptable if
the companies building the plants showed some effort to assure safety in
their design. Do you remember the guy who was posting here immediately
after the tsunami? "Nothing to worry about! The reactors are designed
to contain the melted core!" Yea, right!
El Castor
2018-01-14 19:58:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
The Navy has certainly demonstrated that a standard design can be
developed and implemented with a nearly perfect safety record. You are
not the only conservative who has suggested that to me.
Most if not all of the nuclear plant disasters were caused by or made
worse by really careless mistakes (putting the backup generators in the
basement of the plants in Fukushima where they would be vulnerable to
flooding for example). Nuclear power would be much more acceptable if
the companies building the plants showed some effort to assure safety in
their design. Do you remember the guy who was posting here immediately
after the tsunami? "Nothing to worry about! The reactors are designed
to contain the melted core!" Yea, right!
New designs, if they are ever implemented, could eliminate the
possibility of melted cores. At any rate, considering the dire
consequences of a nuclear mistake, standardized designs, training, and
supervision at the government level were always the way to go ... but
not going to happen. Nuclear power in the US appears to be dead. Maybe
fusion some day, but I doubt any of us will live to see it.
islander
2018-01-15 15:45:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
The Navy has certainly demonstrated that a standard design can be
developed and implemented with a nearly perfect safety record. You are
not the only conservative who has suggested that to me.
Most if not all of the nuclear plant disasters were caused by or made
worse by really careless mistakes (putting the backup generators in the
basement of the plants in Fukushima where they would be vulnerable to
flooding for example). Nuclear power would be much more acceptable if
the companies building the plants showed some effort to assure safety in
their design. Do you remember the guy who was posting here immediately
after the tsunami? "Nothing to worry about! The reactors are designed
to contain the melted core!" Yea, right!
New designs, if they are ever implemented, could eliminate the
possibility of melted cores. At any rate, considering the dire
consequences of a nuclear mistake, standardized designs, training, and
supervision at the government level were always the way to go ... but
not going to happen. Nuclear power in the US appears to be dead. Maybe
fusion some day, but I doubt any of us will live to see it.
I had some exposure to failure analysis during my time at NSA. Not for
nuclear reactors, but for digital circuitry. The same basic principles
apply. It is complicated and expensive. Still, if the penalty for
failure is very high, you have to make the investment. I doubt that DoE
is anywhere near as cautious about failure as NSA, but I know that the
nuclear industry is prone to take shortcuts if it saves money. We have
tried regulating them and that doesn't work, so I think that we agree
that this is one industry where the government should take over, build
the expertise (as Rickover did) and build and operate the plants. As
you say, nuclear power is probably dead and you can blame the
carelessness of the nuclear industry for that!
El Castor
2018-01-15 19:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
The Navy has certainly demonstrated that a standard design can be
developed and implemented with a nearly perfect safety record. You are
not the only conservative who has suggested that to me.
Most if not all of the nuclear plant disasters were caused by or made
worse by really careless mistakes (putting the backup generators in the
basement of the plants in Fukushima where they would be vulnerable to
flooding for example). Nuclear power would be much more acceptable if
the companies building the plants showed some effort to assure safety in
their design. Do you remember the guy who was posting here immediately
after the tsunami? "Nothing to worry about! The reactors are designed
to contain the melted core!" Yea, right!
New designs, if they are ever implemented, could eliminate the
possibility of melted cores. At any rate, considering the dire
consequences of a nuclear mistake, standardized designs, training, and
supervision at the government level were always the way to go ... but
not going to happen. Nuclear power in the US appears to be dead. Maybe
fusion some day, but I doubt any of us will live to see it.
I had some exposure to failure analysis during my time at NSA. Not for
nuclear reactors, but for digital circuitry. The same basic principles
apply. It is complicated and expensive. Still, if the penalty for
failure is very high, you have to make the investment. I doubt that DoE
is anywhere near as cautious about failure as NSA, but I know that the
nuclear industry is prone to take shortcuts if it saves money. We have
tried regulating them and that doesn't work, so I think that we agree
that this is one industry where the government should take over, build
the expertise (as Rickover did) and build and operate the plants. As
you say, nuclear power is probably dead and you can blame the
carelessness of the nuclear industry for that!
Government employees aren't careless? Don't make mistakes? Let's not
get carried away. The idea of government run nuclear power appeals to
me because designs would presumably be standardized, as would be the
training of operators and inspectors -- however, mistake free? Tell
that to some dead Amtrak customers.
islander
2018-01-18 00:00:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
The Navy has certainly demonstrated that a standard design can be
developed and implemented with a nearly perfect safety record. You are
not the only conservative who has suggested that to me.
Most if not all of the nuclear plant disasters were caused by or made
worse by really careless mistakes (putting the backup generators in the
basement of the plants in Fukushima where they would be vulnerable to
flooding for example). Nuclear power would be much more acceptable if
the companies building the plants showed some effort to assure safety in
their design. Do you remember the guy who was posting here immediately
after the tsunami? "Nothing to worry about! The reactors are designed
to contain the melted core!" Yea, right!
New designs, if they are ever implemented, could eliminate the
possibility of melted cores. At any rate, considering the dire
consequences of a nuclear mistake, standardized designs, training, and
supervision at the government level were always the way to go ... but
not going to happen. Nuclear power in the US appears to be dead. Maybe
fusion some day, but I doubt any of us will live to see it.
I had some exposure to failure analysis during my time at NSA. Not for
nuclear reactors, but for digital circuitry. The same basic principles
apply. It is complicated and expensive. Still, if the penalty for
failure is very high, you have to make the investment. I doubt that DoE
is anywhere near as cautious about failure as NSA, but I know that the
nuclear industry is prone to take shortcuts if it saves money. We have
tried regulating them and that doesn't work, so I think that we agree
that this is one industry where the government should take over, build
the expertise (as Rickover did) and build and operate the plants. As
you say, nuclear power is probably dead and you can blame the
carelessness of the nuclear industry for that!
Government employees aren't careless? Don't make mistakes? Let's not
get carried away. The idea of government run nuclear power appeals to
me because designs would presumably be standardized, as would be the
training of operators and inspectors -- however, mistake free? Tell
that to some dead Amtrak customers.
How many people have been killed by the nuclear reactors in Navy subs
and carriers?
m***@my-deja.com
2018-01-18 01:44:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:18:56 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Well good! Now we need to force energy companies to run similar ads to
help us get off of our addiction to fossil fuels.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/
What kind of car do you drive, again? And, uh, how was it you heat
your house and water? Oh yes, and those five evil WPPS power plants
you guys shut down! Good work! They would have produced endless plumes
of CO2, right?
El Castor has a Prius, Islander. He's better than you.
I guess so, but he has posted recently that he will probably revert to a
more conventional gas powered car when he trades in.
As to those five WPPSS power plants, I think that it may have been a
good thing that they were killed. Our experience with nukes at Hanford
has not been good! Personally, I don't trust the promoters (Bechtel) of
projects like WPPSS. It is probably a good thing that these plans did
not proceed beyond the one plant which was finally made operational.
The design is now obsolete (similar to the failed design used at Three
Mile Island) and there are much safer ways to use nuclear power.
Perhaps you are right, but times have changed, and designs exist that
are far safer than the plants WPPS would have built. Bill Gates has
helped to fund TerraPower, a company engaged in promoting those
designs. I would hope that the people of Washington would support such
a plant, but I suspect they would haul out the old signs and start
marching again.
All we have to do is stop selling power to California and our hydro
capacity will be just fine. Otherwise, we have a very vigorous solar
and wind program that is growing.
TerraPower has some good ideas and may be the answer to safe nukes. My
primary objection to nuclear power has been the carelessness of the
companies that have built plants.
This may surprise you, but I believe nuclear power operated by a
government entity focused on safety and standardized designs might not
be a bad idea.
Your fantasy is already a reality Beav. It is called TVA.
A very successful program borne out of the socialist era
of the 1930s
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-18 05:17:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Germany has decided to eliminate all of its nuclear power plants. But they still have the very sticky problem of where they will store all of the nuclear waste they have already produced. A major problem is how to store radioactive waste safely for tens of thousands of years in such a way that groundwater is not contaminated. Good luck.

Deutsche Welle wrote:

<< Following the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in 2011, Germany decided to withdraw from nuclear energy production altogether. But the waste remained, and two years ago a commission made up of scientists, environmentalists and politicians was created. Its goal: to develop criteria for a final nuclear repository. Thereafter, at least two potential sites would be found for the unpopular facility, so that authorities could choose between alternatives.
According to the report, several above-ground sites would be explored, and then later, at those that appeared most suitable, underground. The Bundestag, the lower house of Germany's parliament, must vote on each step along the way. The final decision on the site is to be made by 2030. And waste will begin being deposited from 2050 onward. >>

Eugene FitzAubrey
El Castor
2018-01-18 09:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Germany has decided to eliminate all of its nuclear power plants. But they still have the very sticky problem of where they will store all of the nuclear waste they have already produced. A major problem is how to store radioactive waste safely for tens of thousands of years in such a way that groundwater is not contaminated. Good luck.
<< Following the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe in 2011, Germany decided to withdraw from nuclear energy production altogether. But the waste remained, and two years ago a commission made up of scientists, environmentalists and politicians was created. Its goal: to develop criteria for a final nuclear repository. Thereafter, at least two potential sites would be found for the unpopular facility, so that authorities could choose between alternatives.
According to the report, several above-ground sites would be explored, and then later, at those that appeared most suitable, underground. The Bundestag, the lower house of Germany's parliament, must vote on each step along the way. The final decision on the site is to be made by 2030. And waste will begin being deposited from 2050 onward. >>
Eugene FitzAubrey
A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.

"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/02/nuclear-reactors-consume-radioactive-waste
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-18 16:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
El Castor quoted The Guardian:

<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.

"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>

I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.

The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.

Eugene FitzAubrey
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-18 20:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I was wrong when I wrote:

<< I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. >>

I forgot the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA), which came between the AEC and the DOE:

ERDA replaced the AEC on
October 11, 1974, and the DOE replaced ERDA on October 1, 1977.

You wouldn't be alone if you've never heard of the Energy Research and Development Administration.

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2018-01-18 20:26:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).

A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!

There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
El Castor
2018-01-18 21:17:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).
A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!
There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
Here is what I was referring to ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year

I don't pretend to have any expertise in this area, so your comments
would be appreciated. In any event, the radical environmentalist wing
of US politics, the bunch who killed WPPS, will oppose any power
source that includes the word nuclear, so the US is unlikely to lead
the way.
islander
2018-01-19 15:24:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).
A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!
There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
Here is what I was referring to ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I don't pretend to have any expertise in this area, so your comments
would be appreciated. In any event, the radical environmentalist wing
of US politics, the bunch who killed WPPS, will oppose any power
source that includes the word nuclear, so the US is unlikely to lead
the way.
There have been a lot of experiments in using liquid sodium as a first
stage thermal transfer media in a breeder reactor. The kids starting up
Transatomic seem to be focusing on some variant of that. The approach
suffers from the problem of ultimate disposal of the salt. The Chinese
pebble reactor is interesting. Instead of using fuel rods like most
reactors in operation today, it uses pebbles (spheres the size of golf
balls) but still circulates helium gas to transfer the heat to the heat
exchanger. It is not clear how the graphite coating of the fuel would
limit the nuclear reaction if something were to happen to the pumps that
circulate the helium. Could be an interesting bit of technology.

It is encouraging to see the amount of development work that is going on
around the world, not only in nuclear, but in all aspects of clean
power. China seems to be taking the lead in everything and I doubt that
has anything to do with politics. The Asian countries tend to put a lot
of money into research while the US tends to not want to spend money on
"not picking winners and losers." Our blind faith in the free market
seems to be the primary reason that we don't make strategic investments
in technology. If we could just figure out how to do research and
development with quarterly profits...
El Castor
2018-01-19 22:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).
A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!
There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
Here is what I was referring to ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I don't pretend to have any expertise in this area, so your comments
would be appreciated. In any event, the radical environmentalist wing
of US politics, the bunch who killed WPPS, will oppose any power
source that includes the word nuclear, so the US is unlikely to lead
the way.
There have been a lot of experiments in using liquid sodium as a first
stage thermal transfer media in a breeder reactor. The kids starting up
Transatomic seem to be focusing on some variant of that. The approach
suffers from the problem of ultimate disposal of the salt. The Chinese
pebble reactor is interesting. Instead of using fuel rods like most
reactors in operation today, it uses pebbles (spheres the size of golf
balls) but still circulates helium gas to transfer the heat to the heat
exchanger. It is not clear how the graphite coating of the fuel would
limit the nuclear reaction if something were to happen to the pumps that
circulate the helium. Could be an interesting bit of technology.
It is encouraging to see the amount of development work that is going on
around the world, not only in nuclear, but in all aspects of clean
power. China seems to be taking the lead in everything and I doubt that
has anything to do with politics. The Asian countries tend to put a lot
of money into research while the US tends to not want to spend money on
"not picking winners and losers." Our blind faith in the free market
seems to be the primary reason that we don't make strategic investments
in technology. If we could just figure out how to do research and
development with quarterly profits...
East Asian intelligence outranks Western European. The Chinese were
building their Great Wall when our ancestors were still painting
themselves blue. The 20th century was the century of the United
States. The 21st may belong to China.
islander
2018-01-19 23:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).
A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!
There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
Here is what I was referring to ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I don't pretend to have any expertise in this area, so your comments
would be appreciated. In any event, the radical environmentalist wing
of US politics, the bunch who killed WPPS, will oppose any power
source that includes the word nuclear, so the US is unlikely to lead
the way.
There have been a lot of experiments in using liquid sodium as a first
stage thermal transfer media in a breeder reactor. The kids starting up
Transatomic seem to be focusing on some variant of that. The approach
suffers from the problem of ultimate disposal of the salt. The Chinese
pebble reactor is interesting. Instead of using fuel rods like most
reactors in operation today, it uses pebbles (spheres the size of golf
balls) but still circulates helium gas to transfer the heat to the heat
exchanger. It is not clear how the graphite coating of the fuel would
limit the nuclear reaction if something were to happen to the pumps that
circulate the helium. Could be an interesting bit of technology.
It is encouraging to see the amount of development work that is going on
around the world, not only in nuclear, but in all aspects of clean
power. China seems to be taking the lead in everything and I doubt that
has anything to do with politics. The Asian countries tend to put a lot
of money into research while the US tends to not want to spend money on
"not picking winners and losers." Our blind faith in the free market
seems to be the primary reason that we don't make strategic investments
in technology. If we could just figure out how to do research and
development with quarterly profits...
East Asian intelligence outranks Western European. The Chinese were
building their Great Wall when our ancestors were still painting
themselves blue. The 20th century was the century of the United
States. The 21st may belong to China.
My next door neighbor specializes in worked out mineral mines and China
is one of his best customers. At one point, he was trying to find a way
to get Montana coal to China, but they decided that they didn't need it.
At this point, they are leading the world in renewable energy sources.
m***@my-deja.com
2018-01-22 01:07:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Jeff may have been referring to breeder reactors which produce more fuel
than they consume (from U-238 or T-232) and which consume radio active
waste (that is waste directly produced by the nuclear reaction). There
are a few reasons that they have not been adopted, the primary reason
that they are about 25% more expensive to build. There are also issues
of safety (contamination of the coolant) and nuclear proliferation
(weapon grade plutonium is produced in the process and could be removed
before it is allowed to be consumed in the reactor).
A number of them have been built and I don't think that there are any
producing electricity commercially. One was operating in Germany but it
was shut down after Chernobyl. This is not a game for the faint of heart!
There has also been a lot of work done on traveling wave reactors which
are more efficient in consuming low grade uranium, but which create a
problem of disposing of the reactor itself after the fuel is consumed.
I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there!
Here is what I was referring to ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I don't pretend to have any expertise in this area, so your comments
would be appreciated. In any event, the radical environmentalist wing
of US politics, the bunch who killed WPPS, will oppose any power
source that includes the word nuclear, so the US is unlikely to lead
the way.
There have been a lot of experiments in using liquid sodium as a first
stage thermal transfer media in a breeder reactor. The kids starting up
Transatomic seem to be focusing on some variant of that. The approach
suffers from the problem of ultimate disposal of the salt. The Chinese
pebble reactor is interesting. Instead of using fuel rods like most
reactors in operation today, it uses pebbles (spheres the size of golf
balls) but still circulates helium gas to transfer the heat to the heat
exchanger. It is not clear how the graphite coating of the fuel would
limit the nuclear reaction if something were to happen to the pumps that
circulate the helium. Could be an interesting bit of technology.
It is encouraging to see the amount of development work that is going on
around the world, not only in nuclear, but in all aspects of clean
power. China seems to be taking the lead in everything and I doubt that
has anything to do with politics. The Asian countries tend to put a lot
of money into research while the US tends to not want to spend money on
"not picking winners and losers." Our blind faith in the free market
seems to be the primary reason that we don't make strategic investments
in technology. If we could just figure out how to do research and
development with quarterly profits...
East Asian intelligence outranks Western European. The Chinese were
building their Great Wall when our ancestors were still painting
themselves blue. The 20th century was the century of the United
States. The 21st may belong to China.
The powers that be in China, dimwitted US businessmen, and their
political whores in DC will make damn sure that it is China.
And when that time comes the US will take its rightful place
behind the new world leaders.
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-19 01:13:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Islander wrote:

<< I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there! >>

I heard something similar, and I wonder if your story and mine are connected. Some time in the mid to late'70's, I was in the Earth Sciences Division at LLNL working for a chemist named Howard Tewes. We were a small group of about eight physicists and chemists, and Howard and I worked on PNE Treaty Verification and other odd jobs that came along. One day I heard another member of the group named Jerry Cohen complaining to Howard that we didn't DO anything (exciting) anymore.

A year or so later, Howard and Jerry were telling several of us about a presentation they had given to some group in Lab management. They proposed an experiment in which 'hot' nuclear waste would be inserted in bedrock (like granite) and allowed to melt its way down until it cooled sufficiently for the surrounding rock to solidify and seal the waste in a glass like enclosure. (It wouldn't really be a glass because it would cool very slowly and form a crystalline material, whereas a noncrystalline glass would only be produced by very rapid cooling.)

I wonder if Lowell Wiod was in Lab management at the time. The idea didn't get anywhere, and I believe someone had said it was a crazy idea.

At about the same time, the movie The China Syndrome came out using a similar idea.

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2018-01-19 15:44:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I heard a proposal by Lowell Wood (previously LLNL) to bury them in sand
and intentionally put the reactor into thermal meltdown to melt the sand
into a glass sarcophagus for long term storage. Lots of crazy proposals
out there! >>
I heard something similar, and I wonder if your story and mine are connected. Some time in the mid to late'70's, I was in the Earth Sciences Division at LLNL working for a chemist named Howard Tewes. We were a small group of about eight physicists and chemists, and Howard and I worked on PNE Treaty Verification and other odd jobs that came along. One day I heard another member of the group named Jerry Cohen complaining to Howard that we didn't DO anything (exciting) anymore.
A year or so later, Howard and Jerry were telling several of us about a presentation they had given to some group in Lab management. They proposed an experiment in which 'hot' nuclear waste would be inserted in bedrock (like granite) and allowed to melt its way down until it cooled sufficiently for the surrounding rock to solidify and seal the waste in a glass like enclosure. (It wouldn't really be a glass because it would cool very slowly and form a crystalline material, whereas a noncrystalline glass would only be produced by very rapid cooling.)
I wonder if Lowell Wiod was in Lab management at the time. The idea didn't get anywhere, and I believe someone had said it was a crazy idea.
At about the same time, the movie The China Syndrome came out using a similar idea.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Perhaps. Lowell Wood (and some others at LLNL) were famous for thinking
outside the box. I was at DARPA when the Strategic Space Initiative
(Star Wars) started and everyone including LLNL was scrambling to
protect their budgets or to steal money from other departments. DARPA
lost its directed beam program to Star Wars and was struggling to save
its program in GaAs which exhibited properties of radiation hardness.
Wood visited DARPA to explain how we really didn't need GaAs - just put
circuitry in a can to protect it from an EMT attack. During his
presentation he described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. The casual way
that he described nuclear war really turned people off and distracted
from the whole intent of the presentation.

I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! When my boss found out that I had visited LLNL he was furious
and instructed me to never again deal with the "DoE Mafia!"

I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth.

Definitely a creative person, but I worry about how many loose cannons
there are out there. I'm presently reading about some of the things
that were going on at RAND corporation during Vietnam. Grim!
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-20 00:47:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Islander wrote:

<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>

I never met the man. ☺

<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>

Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.

<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>

That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2018-01-20 02:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ☺
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
El Castor
2018-01-20 07:53:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-20 08:25:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Giant, mega dollar fusion experiments did not appeal to me esthetically. They actually frightened me. But I found small, inexpensive cold fusion experiments very appealing. (Power to the People! ☺)

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2018-01-20 16:07:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Giant, mega dollar fusion experiments did not appeal to me esthetically. They actually frightened me. But I found small, inexpensive cold fusion experiments very appealing. (Power to the People! ☺)
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yea, it would be nice, but it is pretty unlikely that it will amount to
anything.

Generally, I did not like to work with the National Labs. It seemed to
me that they were primarily interested in contract renewals rather than
actually making progress. I'm all for patient money, but I also valued
researchers who would admit failure and move on to new ideas.

My most successful project was very much along the line of "power to the
people." I ran the VLSI program at DARPA which included the MOSIS
project which provided access to semiconductor manufacturing for
research and education purposes. It is still operating 37 years later!
https://www.mosis.com/ Definitely a project that let tens of thousands
of flowers bloom!
islander
2018-01-20 15:50:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!

There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
El Castor
2018-01-20 19:51:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
islander
2018-01-21 02:06:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
El Castor
2018-01-21 20:30:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...

"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste

Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8

BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
islander
2018-01-22 15:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...
"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste
Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8
BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
I didn't know that. There was a lot of interest in concrete boats at
one point, so I'm not surprised. One of the departments at Stanford
even had a joint program with Berkeley to build and compete with
concrete canoes.
El Castor
2018-01-23 00:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...
"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste
Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8
BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
I didn't know that. There was a lot of interest in concrete boats at
one point, so I'm not surprised. One of the departments at Stanford
even had a joint program with Berkeley to build and compete with
concrete canoes.
I did some sailing at one time, and had fantasies of building a
ferrocement boat and sailing around the world. At one time I owned a
Mercury class sloop, the smallest (wood) keel boat on San Francisco
Bay. A few particularly hair raising windy days on the Bay cured me of
my sense of adventure.
islander
2018-01-23 01:09:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...
"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste
Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8
BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
I didn't know that. There was a lot of interest in concrete boats at
one point, so I'm not surprised. One of the departments at Stanford
even had a joint program with Berkeley to build and compete with
concrete canoes.
I did some sailing at one time, and had fantasies of building a
ferrocement boat and sailing around the world. At one time I owned a
Mercury class sloop, the smallest (wood) keel boat on San Francisco
Bay. A few particularly hair raising windy days on the Bay cured me of
my sense of adventure.
I did some sailing in high school and again later on the Chesapeake Bay.
Enjoyed it, but not enough to spend the time and money. Larry
Ellison's America's Cup catamaran did some early trials in the strait
just off our deck a few years ago. That was a really amazing boat, but
proved to be too dangerous. We also have an annual round-the-county
race that starts and finishes within sight of our deck. They alternate
directions in alternate years and when the first leg has the wind at
their back, they sail right at us with their spinnakers full. Spectacular!
http://roundthecounty.com/
El Castor
2018-01-23 03:56:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...
"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste
Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8
BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
I didn't know that. There was a lot of interest in concrete boats at
one point, so I'm not surprised. One of the departments at Stanford
even had a joint program with Berkeley to build and compete with
concrete canoes.
I did some sailing at one time, and had fantasies of building a
ferrocement boat and sailing around the world. At one time I owned a
Mercury class sloop, the smallest (wood) keel boat on San Francisco
Bay. A few particularly hair raising windy days on the Bay cured me of
my sense of adventure.
I did some sailing in high school and again later on the Chesapeake Bay.
Enjoyed it, but not enough to spend the time and money. Larry
Ellison's America's Cup catamaran did some early trials in the strait
just off our deck a few years ago. That was a really amazing boat, but
proved to be too dangerous. We also have an annual round-the-county
race that starts and finishes within sight of our deck. They alternate
directions in alternate years and when the first leg has the wind at
their back, they sail right at us with their spinnakers full. Spectacular!
http://roundthecounty.com/
Most sailing fun I ever had was with a laser car top dinghy. A lot of
fun on a lake. With the right wind it would scoot along at an amazing
speed.

islander
2018-01-23 16:45:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< During his
presentation [Wood] described nuclear war with the expression, "Poppity Pop
Pop" to explain how nuclear weapons would be going off. >>
I never met the man. ?
<< I ran into Lowell again at an airport years later and asked him what he
was up to lately. He excitedly explained how he was proposing to shoot
down asteroids before they could hit the earth. >>
Or maybe I did meet him. I came into Milo Nordyke's office one day when he and someone I didn't know were talking about destroying a dangerous asteroid with a nuclear explosive. I didn't interrupt.
<< I visited LLNL once without my bosses permission and the only time that
was convenient was on a Saturday. Very few people around. I asked for
a tour of their fusion projects and Lowell offered to show me around.
It was pretty impressive, but what impressed me most was that whenever
Lowell needed to get into a laboratory, he would jimmy the door lock
with his pocket knife. Needless to say, I was not impressed with their
security! >>
That would probably be the much publicized Laser Fusion experiment. You had to have a Q clearance to be there, but I think the Security Department would still have been upset about Lowell's forced entry.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Yes, there were two experiments that I was interested in. One was the
Laser experiment which was awesome. Very large CO2 lasers, 12 of them
if I remember correctly, focused to a point where the fusion was
supposed to happen. The other was a very large vacuum chamber that was
intended to contain a plasma experiment.
I've said this before, so if you've heard it ... When I was in high
school, that would be in the, ahem, fifties, another student, the son
of a Russian immigrant got in front of one of my classes and did a
presentation on fusion power generation. I remember very few details,
but I recall the hour glass shape he drew on the blackboard -- which I
believe was an illustration of magnetic confinement. Two teachers were
whispering on the way out of the room -- something about his father.
Anyhow, when I read about fusion power being just around the corner, I
just smile and think what a long corner it has been.
Yes, the joke was that fusion power was 30 years in the future and would
always be 30 years in the future!
There used to be a guy posting here (Earl?) who had worked in the field
and his solution was to find a large salt dome and set off an H-bomb in
it. Then simply use the stored heat that would be generated to run
turbines. Probably a good thing that he was not in a position to make
that decision!
I believe it was Jim Chamblee who favored dumping nuclear waste
encased in concrete in deep ocean trenches. Didn't seem like a great
idea to me. Hope I got that right. If not, wherever he is he probably
still reads this Group and may come around to haunt me. (-8
No, this was definitely not Jim Chamblee. Earl Evleth perhaps?
Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. As I recall he had invested in a
disposal company that had developed some sort of encasement technology
-- which was more sophisticated than plain cement (glass?), but the
deep ocean thing was correct. Here is something relative to your neck
of the woods ...
"Nuke Waste Debate: Turn It Into Glass or Encase in Cement?"
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2017-05-04/report-offers-different-treatment-for-hanford-nuclear-waste
Anyhow, I have no interest in eating two headed salmon. (-8
BTW -- Did you know that Chamblee, before he got into government work,
was in the ferrocement sailboat business?
I didn't know that. There was a lot of interest in concrete boats at
one point, so I'm not surprised. One of the departments at Stanford
even had a joint program with Berkeley to build and compete with
concrete canoes.
I did some sailing at one time, and had fantasies of building a
ferrocement boat and sailing around the world. At one time I owned a
Mercury class sloop, the smallest (wood) keel boat on San Francisco
Bay. A few particularly hair raising windy days on the Bay cured me of
my sense of adventure.
I did some sailing in high school and again later on the Chesapeake Bay.
Enjoyed it, but not enough to spend the time and money. Larry
Ellison's America's Cup catamaran did some early trials in the strait
just off our deck a few years ago. That was a really amazing boat, but
proved to be too dangerous. We also have an annual round-the-county
race that starts and finishes within sight of our deck. They alternate
directions in alternate years and when the first leg has the wind at
their back, they sail right at us with their spinnakers full. Spectacular!
http://roundthecounty.com/
Most sailing fun I ever had was with a laser car top dinghy. A lot of
fun on a lake. With the right wind it would scoot along at an amazing
speed.
http://youtu.be/hF2eK6sCOrI
Scows were very popular for sailing the Caloosahatchee River near where
I went to high school. Shallow draft and very fast. The boat that I
sailed on was fixed keel and we mostly spent time trying to get off sand
bars! We sailed it down to Cuba tho. Quite an experience for me!
bill bowden
2018-01-23 18:30:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
I did some sailing in high school and again later on the Chesapeake Bay.
Enjoyed it, but not enough to spend the time and money. Larry
Ellison's America's Cup catamaran did some early trials in the strait
just off our deck a few years ago. That was a really amazing boat, but
proved to be too dangerous. We also have an annual round-the-county
race that starts and finishes within sight of our deck. They alternate
directions in alternate years and when the first leg has the wind at
their back, they sail right at us with their spinnakers full. Spectacular!
http://roundthecounty.com/
Most sailing fun I ever had was with a laser car top dinghy. A lot of
fun on a lake. With the right wind it would scoot along at an amazing
speed.
http://youtu.be/hF2eK6sCOrI
Back in 1965, 3 of us bought a 28 foot sailboat built in 1938. It was docked in the LA harbor and I lived on it for 2 years. The rent was a dollar a foot so it was 28 dollars divided by 3. 10 bucks a month was cheap rent in those days. One summer day, I sailed the boat to Catalina Island by myself and I met a guy with a 20 foot trimaran who had tried to sail to Hawaii but broke the mast about 200 miles out. His 2 crew members chickened out and didn't want to try it again so he asked me if I wanted to sail to Hawaii. I was classified 1A at the time and was ready to be drafted any day, so I said sure, why not. So the 2 of us took off for Hawaii from LA with 3 sails, 2 paddles and no engine and made it in 28 days. We went too far south and got stuck in a calm with no wind for a week and just paddled all day and night trying to get into the trade winds. Once in the wind we were doing probably 20 knots and surfing down the slopes of the giant sea swells. The rudder shaft was bent at a 45 degree angle by the time we arrived. I was so constipated from eating rice and Vienna Sausage and no fruit for a month, I was bleeding from my rear end. I stayed in Hawaii for a couple months driving a taxi at night until I was drafted and had to come home. But it was fun and I got laid on the beach one night.
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-22 17:02:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
El Castor wrote:

<< Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. >>

I doubt if it was Evleth. He was a chemist. I can't imagine him wanting to dump nuclear waste into the ocean. I remember Chamblee as being impatient enough to favor it.

Eugene FitzAubrey
El Castor
2018-01-23 00:31:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< Hmmm. I think it was Chamblee. >>
I doubt if it was Evleth. He was a chemist. I can't imagine him wanting to dump nuclear waste into the ocean. I remember Chamblee as being impatient enough to favor it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
I didn't agree with his politics, but I liked Earl. Very sad when he
passed.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/92/i1/Earl-M-Evleth.html?type=paidArticleContent
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-23 02:25:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Concerning Earl Evleth, EL Castor wrote:

<< I didn't agree with his politics, but I liked Earl. Very sad when he
passed. >>

Donna. His wife's name just came to me. Someone here harassed Earl rather viciously, and Donna posted back angrily in reply. The two of them engaged in a special kind of leftism in which they championed the causes of convicted criminals (according to French law) and were part of campaigns to get them released from prison. Earl thought the police were watching him.

Is this a crazy group, or what?

Eugene FitzAubrey
b flanier
2018-01-23 03:26:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
Is this a crazy group, or what?
Some of the Newbies (and I include myself in that group) are less
civil, I think, than the "old" group.

This devolution of civility is discouraging but I admit to engaging
in trolling or worse from time to time. I'm trying to do better but
it is difficult at times with folks like Globy, Gary and some others...
and there I go again. <sigh>

Having said that, I'm amazed at the life's journey and experiences
of some of youse guys. We have been so fortunate to live in these
exciting times. Me, I've just been trying to keep the refrigerator box
which is down by the river patched when the river floods. I thank my
lucky stars however, I've only had a 100 year flood and two 500 year
floods in the last three years so I'm good.

Anyway, you accomplished peeps, don't give up on me, I'm pretty close
to perfecting that cold fusion thingy those other guys quit on. Those damn
floods.....Death Valley perhaps?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-23 03:50:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:26:09 -0800 (PST), b flanier
Post by b flanier
Post by d***@gmail.com
Is this a crazy group, or what?
Some of the Newbies (and I include myself in that group) are less
civil, I think, than the "old" group.
I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it.
Post by b flanier
This devolution of civility is discouraging but I admit to engaging
in trolling or worse from time to time. I'm trying to do better but
it is difficult at times with folks like Globy, Gary and some others...
and there I go again. <sigh>
Having said that, I'm amazed at the life's journey and experiences
of some of youse guys. We have been so fortunate to live in these
exciting times. Me, I've just been trying to keep the refrigerator box
which is down by the river patched when the river floods. I thank my
lucky stars however, I've only had a 100 year flood and two 500 year
floods in the last three years so I'm good.
Anyway, you accomplished peeps, don't give up on me, I'm pretty close
to perfecting that cold fusion thingy those other guys quit on. Those damn
floods.....Death Valley perhaps?
El Castor
2018-01-23 03:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I didn't agree with his politics, but I liked Earl. Very sad when he
passed. >>
Donna. His wife's name just came to me. Someone here harassed Earl rather viciously, and Donna posted back angrily in reply. The two of them engaged in a special kind of leftism in which they championed the causes of convicted criminals (according to French law) and were part of campaigns to get them released from prison. Earl thought the police were watching him.
Is this a crazy group, or what?
Eugene FitzAubrey
Or what.
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-23 17:21:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Rumpelstiltskin wrote:

<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>

That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.

Eugene FitzAubrey
El Castor
2018-01-23 21:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-24 00:19:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
El Castor wrote:

<< I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. >>

Earl must have said something to Cajun that enraged him. I try not to do that sort of thing for medical reasons. Stress really can kill. After his first heart attack, I warned Chamblee about overdoing it and suggested relaxing a little. He shrugged it off.

Eugene FitzAubrey
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-24 00:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
El Castor wrote:

<< I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. >>

Earl must have said something to Cajun that enraged him. I try not to do that sort of thing for medical reasons. Stress really can kill. After his first heart attack, I warned Chamblee about overdoing it and suggested relaxing a little. He shrugged it off.

Eugene FitzAubrey
islander
2018-01-24 16:25:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. >>
Earl must have said something to Cajun that enraged him. I try not to do that sort of thing for medical reasons. Stress really can kill. After his first heart attack, I warned Chamblee about overdoing it and suggested relaxing a little. He shrugged it off.
Eugene FitzAubrey
You might enjoy the following article which crossed my desk this morning:

Cogent Communicator: Emotions, Emojis and Other Email Essentials
by Susan de la Vergne 08 Jan 2018
<excerpt>
"You may have heard this advice before: if you write an angry email,
don’t send it, not until you’ve had time to read it again (and maybe
again) when you’ve cooled off. And that’s one reason why. You may have
gotten over it and moved on an hour later, two days later, but your
reader will take it as fresh. That advice applies not only to angry
emails but also to emails that criticize, or that express impatience or
righteous indignation. Put it aside. Read it over later. Seriously
reconsider."
https://insight.ieeeusa.org/articles/email-essentials/
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-25 01:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Islander quoted:

<< excerpt:
"You may have heard this advice before: if you write an angry email,
don’t send it, not until you’ve had time to read it again (and maybe
again) when you’ve cooled off. >>

And Thus the native Hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought and enterprises of great pith and moment with this regard their currents turn awry, and lose the name of action. ☺

Eugene FitzAubrey

rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-24 03:53:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:30:24 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
I remember the name "Cajun", but not who he
was. I was talking about "Capitalist Pig" who
posted as "Capitalist Pig". Maybe Capitalist Pig
as "Cajun" before he completely flipped out, and
then he took the name "Capitalist Pig".

I on the other hand don't remember anything
at all about Earl asking members of the most
"extreme" political groups coming to soc.retirement,
nor can I think of any individuals that he "invited"
that you might be talking about, but I do remember
you accusing him of doing that, which you still do
occasionally. Which individuals might those be? I
was here before Earl was here.

Earl described the attack and the police followup
in detail. I think even you had become disgusted
with Capitalist Pig before that incident, and perhaps
had killfiled him by then, but it wasn't him who
posted about the attack and the arrest. It was Earl.
I can't imagine how you could have missed that, or
how you might have forgotten about it.

I automatically killfile all crossposters too.
El Castor
2018-01-24 04:50:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:30:24 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
I remember the name "Cajun", but not who he
was. I was talking about "Capitalist Pig" who
posted as "Capitalist Pig". Maybe Capitalist Pig
as "Cajun" before he completely flipped out, and
then he took the name "Capitalist Pig".
I on the other hand don't remember anything
at all about Earl asking members of the most
"extreme" political groups coming to soc.retirement,
nor can I think of any individuals that he "invited"
that you might be talking about, but I do remember
you accusing him of doing that, which you still do
occasionally. Which individuals might those be? I
was here before Earl was here.
Earl described the attack and the police followup
in detail. I think even you had become disgusted
with Capitalist Pig before that incident, and perhaps
had killfiled him by then, but it wasn't him who
posted about the attack and the arrest. It was Earl.
I can't imagine how you could have missed that, or
how you might have forgotten about it.
I automatically killfile all crossposters too.
Earl being physically assaulted is not something I would forget. For
some reason I missed it. The invitation thing was infamous. I believe
one of the groups was reputed to have been alt.fan.rush-limbaugh. (-8

BTW -- There is another personality that was the back-bone, or back-
end, depending on your perspective, of this group for many years --
Sordo.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-24 10:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 20:50:47 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:30:24 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
I remember the name "Cajun", but not who he
was. I was talking about "Capitalist Pig" who
posted as "Capitalist Pig". Maybe Capitalist Pig
as "Cajun" before he completely flipped out, and
then he took the name "Capitalist Pig".
I on the other hand don't remember anything
at all about Earl asking members of the most
"extreme" political groups coming to soc.retirement,
nor can I think of any individuals that he "invited"
that you might be talking about, but I do remember
you accusing him of doing that, which you still do
occasionally. Which individuals might those be? I
was here before Earl was here.
Earl described the attack and the police followup
in detail. I think even you had become disgusted
with Capitalist Pig before that incident, and perhaps
had killfiled him by then, but it wasn't him who
posted about the attack and the arrest. It was Earl.
I can't imagine how you could have missed that, or
how you might have forgotten about it.
I automatically killfile all crossposters too.
Earl being physically assaulted is not something I would forget. For
some reason I missed it. The invitation thing was infamous. I believe
one of the groups was reputed to have been alt.fan.rush-limbaugh. (-8
It was famous among yourself I guess, but I don't
remember anybody else mentioning it. That's not
to say it didn't happen, we have a lot of people
wandering in and out of here briefly.

Earl was no conservative, so I can't put together
how you might think he was "inviting" people from
a group called "alt.fan.rush-limbaugh".
Post by El Castor
BTW -- There is another personality that was the back-bone, or back-
end, depending on your perspective, of this group for many years --
Sordo.
You're probably the only person who ever
considered him the "backbone" of the group.
He wasn't as bad as Capitalist Pig, though
they were a duo for a while. What I most
remember about him was when he took to
posting as "Rumpelshitskin", to which I
responded by making forgeries of slight
variations of the worst right-wingers on the
group, of which there were more then than
there are now. I don't remember forging
a variation on your name, but even though
you supported sordo you weren't as bad
as many of the other right-wingers. I'm
not glad sordo's dead, but I don't miss him
at all, and I never thought much of him.
El Castor
2018-01-24 20:05:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 20:50:47 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:30:24 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
I remember the name "Cajun", but not who he
was. I was talking about "Capitalist Pig" who
posted as "Capitalist Pig". Maybe Capitalist Pig
as "Cajun" before he completely flipped out, and
then he took the name "Capitalist Pig".
I on the other hand don't remember anything
at all about Earl asking members of the most
"extreme" political groups coming to soc.retirement,
nor can I think of any individuals that he "invited"
that you might be talking about, but I do remember
you accusing him of doing that, which you still do
occasionally. Which individuals might those be? I
was here before Earl was here.
Earl described the attack and the police followup
in detail. I think even you had become disgusted
with Capitalist Pig before that incident, and perhaps
had killfiled him by then, but it wasn't him who
posted about the attack and the arrest. It was Earl.
I can't imagine how you could have missed that, or
how you might have forgotten about it.
I automatically killfile all crossposters too.
Earl being physically assaulted is not something I would forget. For
some reason I missed it. The invitation thing was infamous. I believe
one of the groups was reputed to have been alt.fan.rush-limbaugh. (-8
It was famous among yourself I guess, but I don't
remember anybody else mentioning it. That's not
to say it didn't happen, we have a lot of people
wandering in and out of here briefly.
Earl was no conservative, so I can't put together
how you might think he was "inviting" people from
a group called "alt.fan.rush-limbaugh".
I've never visited the group, but I assume it gets pretty heated. Earl
would have extended an invitation to the liberal side. Anyhow, that
election brought soc.retirement out of the shadows and got us a lot of
nasty unneeded attention from both sides of the aisle. Fortunately my
news reader has a good filter.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW -- There is another personality that was the back-bone, or back-
end, depending on your perspective, of this group for many years --
Sordo.
You're probably the only person who ever
considered him the "backbone" of the group.
He wasn't as bad as Capitalist Pig, though
they were a duo for a while. What I most
remember about him was when he took to
posting as "Rumpelshitskin", to which I
responded by making forgeries of slight
variations of the worst right-wingers on the
group, of which there were more then than
there are now. I don't remember forging
a variation on your name, but even though
you supported sordo you weren't as bad
as many of the other right-wingers. I'm
not glad sordo's dead, but I don't miss him
at all, and I never thought much of him.
Sordo, wherever you are, I remember you, and always will. (-8
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-24 20:10:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 12:05:21 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 20:50:47 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 13:30:24 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< I've been here a while, and it was always feisty. There was
even an utter turd here who went by the name of "Capitalist Pig",
who "slandered" me, there's no other term for it, by accusing
me of molesting a juvenile at a freeway rest stop, and making
up a story about it out of whole cloth. He eventually moved to
France where he was arrested for physically assaulting
another member of this group, Earl Evleth, who was a
permanent resident of Paris. He vanished from the group
immediately after the assault - I think he may have even done
jail time for it. >>
That is shocking news. Earl used his real name here, and that proved to be dangerous. As I recall, Capitalist Pig also used the name 'cajun' at first. He threatened Earl on several occasions, and once he said something like "I'm in France now and I'm coming after you". Old retired guys really don't need to add being assaulted to their problems. Earl must have been in his late seventies. If the French police looked for evidence here in soc.retirement, they probably would have found it.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Not saying it didn't happen, but I have no recollection of an assault
on Evleth. Maybe I missed the thread, or? I was no fan of Cajun. The
only gripe I have against Earl was that leading up to a presidential
election he apparently visited some of the more extreme political
groups and asked that they come over to this group and assist him in
his fight against conservatives. That may have been the origin of most
of the cross posting around here. Fortunately my news reader has a
filter cross posters option. (-8
I remember the name "Cajun", but not who he
was. I was talking about "Capitalist Pig" who
posted as "Capitalist Pig". Maybe Capitalist Pig
as "Cajun" before he completely flipped out, and
then he took the name "Capitalist Pig".
I on the other hand don't remember anything
at all about Earl asking members of the most
"extreme" political groups coming to soc.retirement,
nor can I think of any individuals that he "invited"
that you might be talking about, but I do remember
you accusing him of doing that, which you still do
occasionally. Which individuals might those be? I
was here before Earl was here.
Earl described the attack and the police followup
in detail. I think even you had become disgusted
with Capitalist Pig before that incident, and perhaps
had killfiled him by then, but it wasn't him who
posted about the attack and the arrest. It was Earl.
I can't imagine how you could have missed that, or
how you might have forgotten about it.
I automatically killfile all crossposters too.
Earl being physically assaulted is not something I would forget. For
some reason I missed it. The invitation thing was infamous. I believe
one of the groups was reputed to have been alt.fan.rush-limbaugh. (-8
It was famous among yourself I guess, but I don't
remember anybody else mentioning it. That's not
to say it didn't happen, we have a lot of people
wandering in and out of here briefly.
Earl was no conservative, so I can't put together
how you might think he was "inviting" people from
a group called "alt.fan.rush-limbaugh".
I've never visited the group, but I assume it gets pretty heated. Earl
would have extended an invitation to the liberal side. Anyhow, that
election brought soc.retirement out of the shadows and got us a lot of
nasty unneeded attention from both sides of the aisle. Fortunately my
news reader has a good filter.
I've never been there either, but it doesn't seem likely
to me there'd be much of a "liberal" side there.
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by El Castor
BTW -- There is another personality that was the back-bone, or back-
end, depending on your perspective, of this group for many years --
Sordo.
You're probably the only person who ever
considered him the "backbone" of the group.
He wasn't as bad as Capitalist Pig, though
they were a duo for a while. What I most
remember about him was when he took to
posting as "Rumpelshitskin", to which I
responded by making forgeries of slight
variations of the worst right-wingers on the
group, of which there were more then than
there are now. I don't remember forging
a variation on your name, but even though
you supported sordo you weren't as bad
as many of the other right-wingers. I'm
not glad sordo's dead, but I don't miss him
at all, and I never thought much of him.
Sordo, wherever you are, I remember you, and always will. (-8
Well, somebody loves him.
El Castor
2018-01-18 20:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste

And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year

I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-18 23:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:55:06 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
Sounds sensible to me.
islander
2018-01-19 15:54:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.

A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
El Castor
2018-01-19 22:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
islander
2018-01-19 23:20:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
But, who would like to live in Jackson MS? I worked for a short time in
Quitman MS, about 40mi east of Jackson where I learned to hate
Mississippi. Then again, I knew a guy who was VP of Research at
American Microsystems until he bet the farm on VMOS technology. It
didn't work out! He went back to Starkville MS, where he grew up and
where he ran a research program at Mississippi State. Back to his
roots, I guess. I visited him several times because he was still well
connected in the semiconductor industry and I valued his help in a
program that I was running at the time. On one occasion he treated me to
lunch at the University of Mississippi Culinary Research Center. This
was a half-timbered chalet in the middle of a field that would have
looked more at home in Germany. The lunch was delicious, consisting of
their best version of southern cooking. They even made their own wine!

But, would I want to live there? Not on your life!
El Castor
2018-01-20 08:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
But, who would like to live in Jackson MS? I worked for a short time in
Quitman MS, about 40mi east of Jackson where I learned to hate
Mississippi. Then again, I knew a guy who was VP of Research at
American Microsystems until he bet the farm on VMOS technology. It
didn't work out! He went back to Starkville MS, where he grew up and
where he ran a research program at Mississippi State. Back to his
roots, I guess. I visited him several times because he was still well
connected in the semiconductor industry and I valued his help in a
program that I was running at the time. On one occasion he treated me to
lunch at the University of Mississippi Culinary Research Center. This
was a half-timbered chalet in the middle of a field that would have
looked more at home in Germany. The lunch was delicious, consisting of
their best version of southern cooking. They even made their own wine!
But, would I want to live there? Not on your life!
I doubt I would either, but if the choice was paying $40,000 a year
rent on a one bedroom San Francisco apartment ...

Mill Valley is a great place to live, but we couldn't afford to buy
here if we hadn't lived here forever. California is pricing itself out
of the labor market. You lived in Palo Alto. Ever think about moving
back -- to a good neighborhood? Good luck with that. It's probably
pricier than Marin. I used to fly out to Houston now and then. I liked
it. Nice neighborhoods in Sugarland and some pretty good restaurants.
A guy I worked with had lived in Austin where he met his wife. They
tired of California and moved back to Austin.
islander
2018-01-20 16:21:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
But, who would like to live in Jackson MS? I worked for a short time in
Quitman MS, about 40mi east of Jackson where I learned to hate
Mississippi. Then again, I knew a guy who was VP of Research at
American Microsystems until he bet the farm on VMOS technology. It
didn't work out! He went back to Starkville MS, where he grew up and
where he ran a research program at Mississippi State. Back to his
roots, I guess. I visited him several times because he was still well
connected in the semiconductor industry and I valued his help in a
program that I was running at the time. On one occasion he treated me to
lunch at the University of Mississippi Culinary Research Center. This
was a half-timbered chalet in the middle of a field that would have
looked more at home in Germany. The lunch was delicious, consisting of
their best version of southern cooking. They even made their own wine!
But, would I want to live there? Not on your life!
I doubt I would either, but if the choice was paying $40,000 a year
rent on a one bedroom San Francisco apartment ...
Mill Valley is a great place to live, but we couldn't afford to buy
here if we hadn't lived here forever. California is pricing itself out
of the labor market. You lived in Palo Alto. Ever think about moving
back -- to a good neighborhood? Good luck with that. It's probably
pricier than Marin. I used to fly out to Houston now and then. I liked
it. Nice neighborhoods in Sugarland and some pretty good restaurants.
A guy I worked with had lived in Austin where he met his wife. They
tired of California and moved back to Austin.
Hell, Palo Alto (and Menlo Park where I lived) were expensive when we
lived there! The real estate market fluctuated wildly and we were lucky
in timing the market, flipping houses three times. At one time I made
more money in real estate than I made at Stanford. But, we bailed out
when the rat race became too stressful. At one point I was shocked to
realize that our mortgage payment was more than my take-home pay!
Fortunately my wife's business was doing well.
No, I don't want to go back and probably could not afford it now.

I recently got a friend request from a guy who moved into East Palo Alto
at the time. He still lives there. That side of the 101 was pretty
blighted at the time, but was a good place to locate a start-up
business. Now I guess it is mostly commercial.

As to Texas, the only place that I might be tempted to consider is
Austin. I hated Houston and Dallas. We have quite a few ex-Texans here
on the island and I don't know of any who would want to return!
El Castor
2018-01-20 19:58:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
But, who would like to live in Jackson MS? I worked for a short time in
Quitman MS, about 40mi east of Jackson where I learned to hate
Mississippi. Then again, I knew a guy who was VP of Research at
American Microsystems until he bet the farm on VMOS technology. It
didn't work out! He went back to Starkville MS, where he grew up and
where he ran a research program at Mississippi State. Back to his
roots, I guess. I visited him several times because he was still well
connected in the semiconductor industry and I valued his help in a
program that I was running at the time. On one occasion he treated me to
lunch at the University of Mississippi Culinary Research Center. This
was a half-timbered chalet in the middle of a field that would have
looked more at home in Germany. The lunch was delicious, consisting of
their best version of southern cooking. They even made their own wine!
But, would I want to live there? Not on your life!
I doubt I would either, but if the choice was paying $40,000 a year
rent on a one bedroom San Francisco apartment ...
Mill Valley is a great place to live, but we couldn't afford to buy
here if we hadn't lived here forever. California is pricing itself out
of the labor market. You lived in Palo Alto. Ever think about moving
back -- to a good neighborhood? Good luck with that. It's probably
pricier than Marin. I used to fly out to Houston now and then. I liked
it. Nice neighborhoods in Sugarland and some pretty good restaurants.
A guy I worked with had lived in Austin where he met his wife. They
tired of California and moved back to Austin.
Hell, Palo Alto (and Menlo Park where I lived) were expensive when we
lived there! The real estate market fluctuated wildly and we were lucky
in timing the market, flipping houses three times. At one time I made
more money in real estate than I made at Stanford. But, we bailed out
when the rat race became too stressful. At one point I was shocked to
realize that our mortgage payment was more than my take-home pay!
Fortunately my wife's business was doing well.
No, I don't want to go back and probably could not afford it now.
I recently got a friend request from a guy who moved into East Palo Alto
at the time. He still lives there. That side of the 101 was pretty
blighted at the time, but was a good place to locate a start-up
business. Now I guess it is mostly commercial.
As to Texas, the only place that I might be tempted to consider is
Austin. I hated Houston and Dallas. We have quite a few ex-Texans here
on the island and I don't know of any who would want to return!
Didn't say I wanted to move there -- but always wise to keep in mind
that there is more to life than the distance to the nearest Starbucks.
An old friend (who has enough money to live wherever he wants) lives
in Idaho and swears he will never set foot in California again.
islander
2018-01-21 01:57:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< A new design uses waste to fuel reactors -- others are 100% melt down
proof.
"New generation of nuclear reactors could consume radioactive waste as
fuel
The new 'fast' plants could provide enough low-carbon electricity to
power the UK for more than 500 years" >>
I am horribly suspicious. The reference to low-carbon electricity is pure propaganda. It is otherwise extraneous to the subject at hand, because all reactors are 'low carbon'. This leads to the suspicion that the British government is promoting Climate Change in order to promote the nuclear power industry. The very name of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) is suspicious. I remember when our Atomic Energy Commission became the Department of Energy overnight. Most people don't know the connection.
The concept of a reactor that would eliminate existing nuclear waste, if accurate, would make it very difficult for countries like Germany to abandon nuclear power.
Eugene FitzAubrey
Here's something about the waste powered reactor ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/3043099/this-nuclear-reactor-eats-nuclear-waste
And melt-down proof ...
https://www.sciencealert.com/china-says-it-ll-have-a-meltdown-proof-nuclear-reactor-ready-by-next-year
I'm not sold on global warming, but I don't have a problem with a
technology that generated power cheaper than hydro-carbon based fuel.
Why would I? I drive a Prius, not to save the world, but to save my
wallet. I light the house with LEDs for the same reason -- my wallet.
Our next car, by the way, will not be a hybrid because no more
subsidies and the miles we put on a car don't justify the added cost
of the hybrid equipment. And no, I never supported hybrid subsidies,
but who am I to turn down free cash? (-8
A guy who I knew at Stanford was working on hybrid car technology as
part of a start-up. Their idea was to use a Wankel engine which
supposedly runs reliably at a constant speed to turn the generator that
produces the electricity. I wonder what ever happened to that project.
The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up.
Post by islander
A friend of mine here on the island owned one of the early Prius cars
and complained constantly about how he had to back up steep hills
because it had no traction on a steep slope. Still, there are quite a
few hybrid and electric cars here. Our local power coop has even placed
several charging stations around the island. A neighbor owns a new
Tesla and loves it. Nice looking car! He hasn't offered to let me
drive it, tho!
Our Prius has no problem with the steepest hills in San Francisco.
Being FWD, and a fairly light weight car, perhaps your friend's Prius
was having a traction problem? Gravel road? Interesting thing about
the Prius, it of course has a gas engine as well as a powerful
electric motor. In backing up it only uses the electric motor. If the
traction battery fails, you can still drive forwards with the gas
engine -- but no backing up. BTW -- you can buy a nice house in
Jackson Mississippi for considerably less than a Tesla. (-8
But, who would like to live in Jackson MS? I worked for a short time in
Quitman MS, about 40mi east of Jackson where I learned to hate
Mississippi. Then again, I knew a guy who was VP of Research at
American Microsystems until he bet the farm on VMOS technology. It
didn't work out! He went back to Starkville MS, where he grew up and
where he ran a research program at Mississippi State. Back to his
roots, I guess. I visited him several times because he was still well
connected in the semiconductor industry and I valued his help in a
program that I was running at the time. On one occasion he treated me to
lunch at the University of Mississippi Culinary Research Center. This
was a half-timbered chalet in the middle of a field that would have
looked more at home in Germany. The lunch was delicious, consisting of
their best version of southern cooking. They even made their own wine!
But, would I want to live there? Not on your life!
I doubt I would either, but if the choice was paying $40,000 a year
rent on a one bedroom San Francisco apartment ...
Mill Valley is a great place to live, but we couldn't afford to buy
here if we hadn't lived here forever. California is pricing itself out
of the labor market. You lived in Palo Alto. Ever think about moving
back -- to a good neighborhood? Good luck with that. It's probably
pricier than Marin. I used to fly out to Houston now and then. I liked
it. Nice neighborhoods in Sugarland and some pretty good restaurants.
A guy I worked with had lived in Austin where he met his wife. They
tired of California and moved back to Austin.
Hell, Palo Alto (and Menlo Park where I lived) were expensive when we
lived there! The real estate market fluctuated wildly and we were lucky
in timing the market, flipping houses three times. At one time I made
more money in real estate than I made at Stanford. But, we bailed out
when the rat race became too stressful. At one point I was shocked to
realize that our mortgage payment was more than my take-home pay!
Fortunately my wife's business was doing well.
No, I don't want to go back and probably could not afford it now.
I recently got a friend request from a guy who moved into East Palo Alto
at the time. He still lives there. That side of the 101 was pretty
blighted at the time, but was a good place to locate a start-up
business. Now I guess it is mostly commercial.
As to Texas, the only place that I might be tempted to consider is
Austin. I hated Houston and Dallas. We have quite a few ex-Texans here
on the island and I don't know of any who would want to return!
Didn't say I wanted to move there -- but always wise to keep in mind
that there is more to life than the distance to the nearest Starbucks.
An old friend (who has enough money to live wherever he wants) lives
in Idaho and swears he will never set foot in California again.
I've posted in another thread that the Happiness Index looks at more
than money and liberal states rank higher than conservative states.
Conservative states get a correlation coefficient of -0.32 on a scale of
+1 to -1. California ranks pretty high, but the liberal states are
pretty strongly clustered. There is a lot of dispersion in the
conservative states with the low population western states ranking high,
but the states in the southeast ranking very low.

The scoring is based on 1) Emotional & Physical Well-being, 2) Work
Environment and 3) Community & Environment. Overall, they used 28
relevant metrics to score states.

Bernardo, Richie, 2016’s Happiest States in America, WalletHub, Sept 12,
2016, https://wallethub.com/edu/happiest-states/6959/

So no, money isn't everything!
d***@gmail.com
2018-01-20 01:21:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
El Castor wrote:

<< The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up. >>

When I worked for Lockheed in Mountain View (c. 1967) I was a short walk from a foreign car repair shop. They said forget it when I asked about stopping my Fiat 600 from leaking oil, but they were friendlier when I asked about the NSU Prinz with the new Wankel engine, which was something that fascinated me. They had serviced several of those little beauties, and yes NSU had solved the problem with the seals at the tips of the three rotors. But the cars they repaired did have electrical
problems, which of course were unrelated to the Wankel engine.

I was encouraged when Mazda came out with their Wankel and sorry to hear about Jeff's problems with it.

There's still hope. Briggs & Stratton took out a license to build Wankel engines for their lawn mowers.

Eugene FitzAubrey
El Castor
2018-01-20 08:07:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by d***@gmail.com
<< The Wankel was a rotary engine, so always interested in new things,
long ago I bought a used rotary Mazda -- one of the first. Very quiet
smooth running -- all around marvelous! I loved it!! Until I
discovered that the damn thing was only good for 20K miles between
major, very expensive overhauls!! Aieeeee! Mazda continued to make
them for a few years, solved many of the problems, but eventually gave
up. >>
When I worked for Lockheed in Mountain View (c. 1967) I was a short walk from a foreign car repair shop. They said forget it when I asked about stopping my Fiat 600 from leaking oil, but they were friendlier when I asked about the NSU Prinz with the new Wankel engine, which was something that fascinated me. They had serviced several of those little beauties, and yes NSU had solved the problem with the seals at the tips of the three rotors. But the cars they repaired did have electrical
problems, which of course were unrelated to the Wankel engine.
I was encouraged when Mazda came out with their Wankel and sorry to hear about Jeff's problems with it.
The problem I experienced was the seal problem you described. It
happened to me, was very expensive to fix, and when it began to show
the symptoms again I sold it to a used car dealer in San Francisco. I
couldn't bring myself to unload the damn thing on a private party. BTW
-- as I recall, my Mazda was an R-100. My recollection is the R-100
came after the NSU, so if NSU fixed the seals ... Should make a great
lawn mower motor though -- less noise and vibration.
Post by d***@gmail.com
There's still hope. Briggs & Stratton took out a license to build Wankel engines for their lawn mowers.
Eugene FitzAubrey
DGW
2018-01-12 16:56:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
I just saw a truly bizarre anti-smoking commercial that blew my mind.
You corporation haters are going to LOVE it! Being a cigarette hater
myself, I was glad to see it, but considering that cigarette companies
were required to pay for it was delightful! Here it is ... BTW -- the
following web site describes the ad as bland. I don't think so. It is
unlike any commercial I have ever seen -- which should grab your
attention, at least it did mine.
http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/anti-smoking-tv-ads-big-tobacco-forced-run/311379
Lite 'um up boys! Nothing like thinning out the ranks of the mentally
disadvantaged. That was then.

This is now .........
Loading Image...

so goes one, so go we all ........
Loading Image...

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Loading...