re: You didn't understand a thing I said, did you....
You wrote:
I showed that the effect is negligeable- that the power output of nuclear power is far less than the power output from other sources... I did a WORST case calculation assuming NO radiative cooling and showed just how miniscule it was....
Yes, you made calculations without understanding how nuclear fission heats its surroundings.
You wrote:
I pointed out that there is NOTHING special about nuclear power in this respect, you can make the same erroneous argument about coal power, I pointed out that the power of the sunlight hitting the property of a nuclear power plant is comparable to the power plant itself...
That sunshine then doubles the heat of that area, or not?
You wrote:
In short I did TRIVIAL calculations that YOU should have done yourself and showed your claims were laughable. You ignored the facts despite your claims that you wanted to learn.
Oh, I learned a lot, I learned that despite the fact that you do not know why some nuclei split apart by themselves or why those parts heat the surrounding molecules or why the nuclear activity increases in the nuclear reactor, you still insist that your numbers represent the final word in these matters.
I also have learned that you are very arrogant and boorish in your writing style.
You wrote:
It is YOUR damn turn, YOU put up the numbers showing you are right.... I will shoot them down easily since I have already established an upper bound and shown it is negligeable.
I suppose that if I can not describe my concepts by using numbers and you can not explain your concepts without using numbers, then we are unable to communicate with each other.
You wrote:
So quit changing the subject and admit that your claims are bullshit.The excrement from a bull has nothing to do with the subject.
The original question was: Are you sure that nuclear power is the best way to solve the energy problems.
Apparently you are convinced that nuclear is the best solution and you claim that the numbers that you have placed here at HZ are the proof that you are correct.
But I can not accept your proof until you can show to me that you thoroughly understand the difference between the power generation by nuclear means and fossil fuel means.
By “difference“ I mean the total energy production in the molecular and atomic level and all the effects from the waste products.
Since you know how to use the calculator, perhaps you could answer the question that I posed in another post.
From:
http://www.nucleartourist.com/world/wwide1.htm
Argonne National Laboratory International Nuclear Safety Center's (INSC) Database.There are currently about 440 operating reactors in the world.
One reactor alone has 2.8 tons of U-235 in it.
Not all reactor are made the same way but if they were then 2.8 tons * 440 reactors = 1232 tons of U235 is disintegrating right now and each atom generates 200 MeV = 3.2 × 10-11 J of energy.
Now you tell me how many atoms there are in 1,232 tons of U235 then that will give us some idea of what thispiss can do.
Thank you for the effort to enlighten me.