FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > scientist required please
scientist required please
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
We have taken metals, coal, oil and now we are going to fracture rocks and extract gas, all from under the surface of the earth.
Why do we not deflate like a balloon losing all its air.
Happy swinging while it lasts just in case  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have taken metals, coal, oil and now we are going to fracture rocks and extract gas, all from under the surface of the earth.
Why do we not deflate like a balloon losing all its air.
Happy swinging while it lasts just in case "
We're barely scratching the surface... literally. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Think of of it more as a high strength sponge the gas is within tiny cracks and pores or even absorbed into the rock itself.
We do get subsidence issues above old mine workings, they are quite rare, but some of them can be quite serious. Some houses have had to be abandoned and even demolished because they become structurally unsafe due to the subsidence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Basically its shale gas they are after...shale is very unstable and is a cause of many landslips. The pump water into the gaps/cracks between the the layers of shale, this causes expansion so they can extract what small amount is left.
Apart from subsidence issues there are severe risks from pollution of groundwaters and springs from seepage...
Disaster waiting to happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We have taken metals, coal, oil and now we are going to fracture rocks and extract gas, all from under the surface of the earth.
Why do we not deflate like a balloon losing all its air.
Happy swinging while it lasts just in case "
.
The fact is to an extent we are!.
The earth's crust is very thin and is constantly moving, all were doing is helping it!.
The rise of sink holes and earthquakes is probably helped along by our lifestyle.
Fracking does cause minor earthquakes, even the fracking companies have admitted it. You can't fracture millions of square miles of rock without consequence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Think of of it more as a high strength sponge the gas is within tiny cracks and pores or even absorbed into the rock itself.
We do get subsidence issues above old mine workings, they are quite rare, but some of them can be quite serious. Some houses have had to be abandoned and even demolished because they become structurally unsafe due to the subsidence. "
Subsidence issues caused by mining are far from rare. An estimated £175 million subsidence insurance claims are paid annually with 15% of those due to mining related subsidence (allegedly). Anyone purchasing a property in an area where mining has taken place is advised by their solicitor (and required by the lender) to carry out a mining search. Would you buy a house built over a tunnel. (Not sure I would even trust a London property...) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Think of of it more as a high strength sponge the gas is within tiny cracks and pores or even absorbed into the rock itself.
We do get subsidence issues above old mine workings, they are quite rare, but some of them can be quite serious. Some houses have had to be abandoned and even demolished because they become structurally unsafe due to the subsidence.
Subsidence issues caused by mining are far from rare. An estimated £175 million subsidence insurance claims are paid annually with 15% of those due to mining related subsidence (allegedly). Anyone purchasing a property in an area where mining has taken place is advised by their solicitor (and required by the lender) to carry out a mining search. Would you buy a house built over a tunnel. (Not sure I would even trust a London property...)"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Everytime a spaceship is launched and leaves earth we slow down our rotation, which I slowing naturally too.
Question is will supernova, ourselves or meteor/asteroid get us first.
 "
.
Save the planet?.
That's the biggest joke only humans could come up with.
The planet is doing just fucking fine, the chances are it'll still be spinning around these parts in 4 billon years time. It's doing just dandy..... It's us that needs saving from ourselves |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
to all those you want to stop the search for new resources , cut of your gas, electric, phone and return to the stone age and before you troll me just check how much of the stuff you own is made from oil and just how do you think your lifestyle would survive without it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"to all those you want to stop the search for new resources , cut of your gas, electric, phone and return to the stone age and before you troll me just check how much of the stuff you own is made from oil and just how do you think your lifestyle would survive without it"
.
It wouldn't survive without it, which is exactly why we should look for alternatives now before it runs in short supply.
What your advocating is sticking your head in the sand, because you wish to continue with a lifestyle that will end sooner or later and you'd prefer sooner because that's still in your life.
Or fuck the next generation as long as I can still drive my car!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" why we should look for alternatives now before it runs in short supply.
What your advocating is sticking your head in the sand, because you wish to continue with a lifestyle that will end sooner or later and you'd prefer sooner because that's still in your life.
Or fuck the next generation as long as I can still drive my car!!"
Lovely, well put! I am absolutely committed to ensuring that kids yet to be born are not as doomed as they may be, without us aiming to do our best to find new alternatives.
We largely need the producers to be doing more, as well as political influence upon business and the masses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Everytime a spaceship is launched and leaves earth we slow down our rotation, which I slowing naturally too.
Question is will supernova, ourselves or meteor/asteroid get us first.
"
My money is on getting eaten by a pan galactic space goat  ... silly bet really as it's hard to collect my winnings  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sorry to hijack your thread and tell me to fuck off if you want... But why do candles lose mass?! "
.
An interesting analogy.
The world uses 85 million barrels a day.
At 42 gallons to the barrel, that’s three billion, five hundred and seventy million gallons of oil (3,570,000,000).
Niagara falls has a flow rate of 150,000 U.S. gallons per second.
3,570,000,000 of oil / 150,000 gallons per second = 23,800 seconds of flow equivalent.
In other words, if by some horrific means you were able to replace the flow over niagara falls with nothing but oil for 6.6 hours a day, that’s how much oil the 6 billion inhabitants of the earth burn every single day of every year, and have been for more or less the past ten years.
And as we know your turning your mass of (paraffin) candle wax into byproducts of H2O,CO2, CO, SO, SO2, NO, NO2.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago
Somewhere in North Norfolk |
"Sorry to hijack your thread and tell me to fuck off if you want... But why do candles lose mass?! "
When? When they burn? Because some of the wax is being burnt.
The wax is the fuel in a candle. The wick is to deliver the liquid fuel to the flame. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"to all those you want to stop the search for new resources , cut of your gas, electric, phone and return to the stone age and before you troll me just check how much of the stuff you own is made from oil and just how do you think your lifestyle would survive without it"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Nuclear Energy all the way. "
.
World consumption is approx 200,000 Terrawatt hours with expectancy of around 400,000 within 15 years.
If we decided nuclear was the only option to provide this you would need around 10_000 more of the currently biggest plants in operation.
These stations would consume the known world's resources of u235 within ten to twenty years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have taken metals, coal, oil and now we are going to fracture rocks and extract gas, all from under the surface of the earth.
Why do we not deflate like a balloon losing all its air.
Happy swinging while it lasts just in case "
Don't worry Cuadrilla are going to pump drinking water in to replace the gas it extracts, it's not as if we ever have water shortages in this green and pleasant land...
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sorry to hijack your thread and tell me to fuck off if you want... But why do candles lose mass?! "
In reality it does not, when you burn a candle you convert stored energy into light, heat and a number of gasses. If you actually annihilated its mass the explosion would wipe out your home and probably a large area around you.
Think small atom bomb!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sorry to hijack your thread and tell me to fuck off if you want... But why do candles lose mass?!
In reality it does not, when you burn a candle you convert stored energy into light, heat and a number of gasses. If you actually annihilated its mass the explosion would wipe out your home and probably a large area around you.
Think small atom bomb!
"
.
No I think your confusing energy with mass.
The candle loses mass as it burns the wick draws the wax melts it, vaporises and burns off with bi products, your converting mass into energy.
That's why you have no candle left at the end and is what happens in a nuclear reaction? The exception being the energy released from splitting atoms is the same as the energy used to put them together in the first place( big boom)
But I'm pretty sure you'll always lose matter.
Having said that I'm pretty sure some rectors put energy into mass and LHC definitely does.
So now I'm not sure
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later."
And THAT is exactly what I do for a living
Nuclear Fusion research....
Inside our vessels it's about 15x hotter than the sun.
Without nuclear fusion nothing on earth would exist... This is how the sun produces it's energy
Anyway, we will have 24/7 nuclear fusion reactors in about 50 years or so...
Unfortunately our government is piss poor at funding us and we are world leaders... I work about 100m from a world leading fusion vessel
Looks like the Chinese will be first to productionise though due to heavy investment...
Ps fusion is inherently safe if you are worried... Unlike fission where we have had Chernobyl etc
I could go on but I would rather talk about boobs any day x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later.
And THAT is exactly what I do for a living
Nuclear Fusion research....
Inside our vessels it's about 15x hotter than the sun.
Without nuclear fusion nothing on earth would exist... This is how the sun produces it's energy
Anyway, we will have 24/7 nuclear fusion reactors in about 50 years or so...
Unfortunately our government is piss poor at funding us and we are world leaders... I work about 100m from a world leading fusion vessel
Looks like the Chinese will be first to productionise though due to heavy investment...
Ps fusion is inherently safe if you are worried... Unlike fission where we have had Chernobyl etc
I could go on but I would rather talk about boobs any day x"
50 years, I had hoped we were much closer than that.
It's importance cannot be overestimated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There always saying they've almost cracked fusion, it's only 20 years.
I agree completely with the lack of funding though, but then again they don't find anything, we could go the route of liquid salt reactors now, it's proven they work, they've built, it's much more doable and their inherently safer and would go some way in solving our rare earth shortage through thorium.
But they won't fund that either, let's face facts the only reason they funded atomic research and the reactors we have today was for plutonium and bombs  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"to all those you want to stop the search for new resources , cut of your gas, electric, phone and return to the stone age and before you troll me just check how much of the stuff you own is made from oil and just how do you think your lifestyle would survive without it"
Which makes even more of a reason not to burn the damned stuff.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A thousand or so miles south of us is the world's biggest desert & up above is our nearest star &............................. 1 + 1 =  "
Unfortunately most of the countries in that area are political basket cases. There would need to be major infrastructure upgrades to distribute any energy generated (essentially a HVDC spine for the European grids). There was an organisation called Desertec that was pushing this idea. The HVDC distribution could have matched generating capacity across Europe and really smoothed the increase in variability in some renewables like wind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later.
And THAT is exactly what I do for a living
Nuclear Fusion research....
Inside our vessels it's about 15x hotter than the sun.
Without nuclear fusion nothing on earth would exist... This is how the sun produces it's energy
Anyway, we will have 24/7 nuclear fusion reactors in about 50 years or so...
Unfortunately our government is piss poor at funding us and we are world leaders... I work about 100m from a world leading fusion vessel
Looks like the Chinese will be first to productionise though due to heavy investment...
Ps fusion is inherently safe if you are worried... Unlike fission where we have had Chernobyl etc
I could go on but I would rather talk about boobs any day x"
Do you work on the tocamak? Or maybe at RHEL (is that still at Harwell or has it gone the same way as Daresbury?) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Nuclear Energy all the way. .
World consumption is approx 200,000 Terrawatt hours with expectancy of around 400,000 within 15 years.
If we decided nuclear was the only option to provide this you would need around 10_000 more of the currently biggest plants in operation.
These stations would consume the known world's resources of u235 within ten to twenty years."
Who knew professor Hal from the public understandings of science was on fabswingers?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Nuclear is all well and good, but it requires political decisions that will work over 200+ years to be able to de-commission reactor sites. New designs are far better at being able to be decommissioned as we have learned our lessons. Politicians are too vapid to think beyond the next election and can't be trusted with decisions like this.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later.
And THAT is exactly what I do for a living
Nuclear Fusion research....
Inside our vessels it's about 15x hotter than the sun.
Without nuclear fusion nothing on earth would exist... This is how the sun produces it's energy
Anyway, we will have 24/7 nuclear fusion reactors in about 50 years or so...
Unfortunately our government is piss poor at funding us and we are world leaders... I work about 100m from a world leading fusion vessel
Looks like the Chinese will be first to productionise though due to heavy investment...
Ps fusion is inherently safe if you are worried... Unlike fission where we have had Chernobyl etc
I could go on but I would rather talk about boobs any day x
Do you work on the tocamak? Or maybe at RHEL (is that still at Harwell or has it gone the same way as Daresbury?)"
So Nuclear Fusion on Earth isn't scifi...we produce fusion energy every day... The issue is that we only do it for about a second or so....Obviously what is needed is to switch on the reactor and let it run 24/7 creating "free" energy
That is about 50 years away unfortunately!
It's an engineering challenge... The physics is pretty simple and you all know the basic equation (E = MC^2)... The Sun bombards Hydrogen atoms together to produce Helium...there is a mass difference and, therefore energy is given off (Einsteins famous equation above)
We don't use Hydrogen we bombard Deuterium and Tritium as it's more energy efficient on earth...Deuterium comes from water and Tritium is bred in the reactor from Lithium...the waste product is Helium. as we only use tiny amounts of lithium (and it's abundant) there is enough for many thousands of years..
IMHO Fusion is the future for man kinds energy use.... All the other things, wind, solar etc are just small beans and can't ever produce enough energy (important now though of course).
Fission is dangerous and produces waste that has massive half lives that needs managing for thousands of years... No such issues with fusion (although there is radioactive waste but it's orders of magnitudes less and has very short half lives)
Bored yet? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz lol
If I say anymore I'd have to track you down.... I've all but said which office I work in lol
Pervert geeks with girlfriends eh....who'd have thought it!
X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A group of scientists are or were trying to create a miniature laboratory housed sun, they claimed this can power the world with no harmful effects/waste ?
Here's hoping its sooner rather than later.
And THAT is exactly what I do for a living
Nuclear Fusion research....
Inside our vessels it's about 15x hotter than the sun.
Without nuclear fusion nothing on earth would exist... This is how the sun produces it's energy
Anyway, we will have 24/7 nuclear fusion reactors in about 50 years or so...
Unfortunately our government is piss poor at funding us and we are world leaders... I work about 100m from a world leading fusion vessel
Looks like the Chinese will be first to productionise though due to heavy investment...
Ps fusion is inherently safe if you are worried... Unlike fission where we have had Chernobyl etc
I could go on but I would rather talk about boobs any day x
Do you work on the tocamak? Or maybe at RHEL (is that still at Harwell or has it gone the same way as Daresbury?)
So Nuclear Fusion on Earth isn't scifi...we produce fusion energy every day... The issue is that we only do it for about a second or so....Obviously what is needed is to switch on the reactor and let it run 24/7 creating "free" energy
That is about 50 years away unfortunately!
It's an engineering challenge... The physics is pretty simple and you all know the basic equation (E = MC^2)... The Sun bombards Hydrogen atoms together to produce Helium...there is a mass difference and, therefore energy is given off (Einsteins famous equation above)
We don't use Hydrogen we bombard Deuterium and Tritium as it's more energy efficient on earth...Deuterium comes from water and Tritium is bred in the reactor from Lithium...the waste product is Helium. as we only use tiny amounts of lithium (and it's abundant) there is enough for many thousands of years..
IMHO Fusion is the future for man kinds energy use.... All the other things, wind, solar etc are just small beans and can't ever produce enough energy (important now though of course).
Fission is dangerous and produces waste that has massive half lives that needs managing for thousands of years... No such issues with fusion (although there is radioactive waste but it's orders of magnitudes less and has very short half lives)
Bored yet? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz lol
If I say anymore I'd have to track you down.... I've all but said which office I work in lol
Pervert geeks with girlfriends eh....who'd have thought it!
X"
.
Everyone loves a geek .
Well I do, we've know the physics for years it's the engineering I believe will need alot of advancing, the massive temperatures and super conducting magnets are problematic to say the least.
I think your right with the 50 years and the future way forward, but what about the next 50 years?.
I've read quite a bit on thorium reactors and I must admit I'm quite taken with them, and that's from my personal stand point of anti nuclear. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
