Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NNadir

(35,308 posts)
10. For many decades I've heard taunts about nuclear cars.
Mon Feb 10, 2025, 11:31 AM
Feb 10

They are easy to dismiss as irrelevant to any serious interest in sustainability; I have often expressed my contempt for the belief that the maintenance of the car CULTure is more important than the stability of the planetary atmosphere. Bit supposes an ethical purview in which I cannot in any way.

There is a difference between energy storage of thermodynamically degraded electricity in mass intensive batteries that
further degrade it and exergy capture using high temperature flows in heat networks, an engineering concept that is widely discussed in the scientific literature, generally referred to as "process intensification." Much of the chemistry of these processes are well known; some even operate or have operated on industrial scale. As it happens the processes may produce chemical energy with electricity as a side product. This however is not storage so much as recovery, specifically the recovery of exergy.

Whomever the "we" are for whom you claim to speak, I would agree that for them, they are unfamiliar with more sophisticated thinking in energy engineering. It's OK. I know from direct experience how difficult it is no matter how much passion one might exhibit, to find the time and intellectual rigor to approach these points, many of which are arcane.

I'm not sure what you are saying about the graphic and I really don't care what it might be. I have worked with iea data in many forms for decades as well as data on the destructive and often reactionary practices in other settings that have led to the collapse of the planetary atmosphere.

To me, the issue is not about thermodyamically degraded energy, whether it be mechanical, electrical or in cases such as hydrogen, which is regularly hyped by tiresome fools, chemical.

I am interested in primary energy, in particular that can be expressed as heat, the hottest that can be safely contained being the best. I do not apologize for my firm belief that the only sustainable such form of primary energy is nuclear.

Now maybe you can politely consider whether you are willing to return this thread to its purpose.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Win a heart contest: Co...»Reply #10