Sentences with phrase «about nuclear technology»
There are plenty of important questions about nuclear technology going forward, but to my mind responsible operation of existing plants is one of those green acts.
https://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/ Not exact matches
Though the country's claims about its technology are often exaggerated, North Korea's latest advancement in its missile program have drawn concern from officials at the White House, who have said the country is «developing a pretty good nuclear reentry vehicle.»
NEW YORK, April 30 - Oil prices rallied on Monday after Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran had lied about pursuing nuclear weapons after signing a 2015 deal with global powers, while global stock indexes dipped with the S&P 500 led down by losses in technology.
As our knowledge of nuclear power, for example, increased and we built more and more nuclear power plants, we discovered how little we really knew about the new world of technology we ushered ourselves into, with risks previously unknown and unanticipated.
Amongst other things it talks about how microscope and telescope technology has changed, how nuclear power works, and lasers, although I had to turn this page over quickly as pictures of eyes freak me out a bit.
In particular, a relatively new form of nuclear technology could overcome the principal drawbacks of current methods — namely, worries about reactor accidents, the potential for diversion of nuclear fuel into highly destructive weapons, the management of dangerous, long - lived radioactive waste, and the depletion of global reserves of economically available uranium.
He told lawmakers that he is «excited and passionate» about advancing the core missions of the department, from maintenance and modernization of the nuclear weapons stockpile to the advancement of modern energy technologies.
Concerns about global warming and oil's imminent demise have caused scientists and policy - makers to look for solutions in both the future and the past: to new technologies such as nuclear fusion, multijunction photovoltaics, and fuel cells — and to traditional energy sources such as water power, wind power, and (sustainable) biomass cultivation (coupled with clean and energy - efficient combustion).
«In order to spread nuclear technologies, you have to have the people who have the expertise in nuclear engineering, who know about nuclear materials and chain reactions and things like that — the same expertise for nuclear bombs.
When you consider that during this 10 - year period the number of physical science job openings is projected to be about half the number of physical science degrees granted by U.S. universities, occupations such as radiation therapy (median salary $ 74,980, according to BLS) and nuclear medicine technology (median salary $ 68,560) start to seem attractive.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded in 1945 by scientists who created the atomic bomb as part of the Manhattan Project and wanted to raise awareness about the dangers of nuclear technology.
The Society believes that research involving the transfer of a human nucleus into an animal egg will lead to important new knowledge about cell nuclear replacement (CNR) technology and, if it were to prove possible to produce embryonic stem cells by this route, would increase understanding of how to programme these cells to develop into different tissue types.
For better or worse, with its lengthy cutscenes and frequent penchant for filibuster - worthy speeches about nuclear weapons and technology, Metal Gear Solid revolutionized a cinematic approach to video game storytelling that still influences the industry today, all through a science - fiction lens of mechs, genetically enhanced soldiers, and nanomachines.
This fascinating documentary about the quest for nuclear fusion as a silver bullet for the world's energy thirst is at the same time informative and entertaining as it dives into both the insane and insanely expensive ways of achieving the technology (see the trailer for a taste).
I personally would never follow your advice about anything because you've destroyed your own credibility by insisting on propagating misleading and inaccurate rumors about PV technology, but perhaps you're better informed about nuclear energy.
To me, for example, Hansen's far too confident about the scale at which nuclear power, particularly the new technologies that he prefers, could be deployed by the middle of this century.
While all such forecasts are implicitly uncertain, this one helps clarify where to focus efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions; reinforces the importance of resolving questions about how to safely expand, while not stopping, extraction of vast domestic reserves of natural gas; and powerfully challenges proponents of accelerated deployment of today's menu of renewable energy technologies or nuclear power plants to lay out a credible strategy for supplanting coal.
To be honest, it seems to me that all this focus on «the R - word» misses an essential point about nuclear fission technology at this moment in time.
Although you state you support nuclear, you seem to have a much better understanding of the anti-nuclear talking points than of the facts about nuclear — such as safety and costs (compared with other electricity generating technologies).
Nuclear is about the safest electricity generation technology.
However, you don't want to argue for a rational solution — i.e. cheap nuclear power (which also happens to be 10 to 100 times safer than our currently accepted main source of electricity generation, fossil fuel) and also happens to be a near zero emission technology (in fact much lower than renewables given they need fossil fuel backup, and given solar needs about 10 times as much material per TWh on an LCA basis).
Cheap natural gas, stagnant power demand, and power prices that have fallen significantly since 2008 have jeopardized the economics of about two - thirds of the nation's 100 - GW nuclear capacity, according to a working paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
As a result, despite periodic energy price spikes caused by disruptive world events and about $ 50 billion (in real terms) in energy R&D funding since 1978, the United States has made only steady incremental progress in developing and deploying advanced renewable, coal, and nuclear technologies that can compete with conventional energy technologies.
I'm genuinely unsure about nuclear, though I will admit that I have at least some reservations based on the «scale» of the technology - there is a sense of it being outside of my (perhaps what I mean is more like «a single human's») control.
[9] Nuclear power is about the safest of all electricity generation technologies — nuclear would avoid 1 million fatalities per year by 2050 compared with coal: https://judithcurry.com/2012/08/17/learning-from-the-octopus/#commentNuclear power is about the safest of all electricity generation technologies — nuclear would avoid 1 million fatalities per year by 2050 compared with coal: https://judithcurry.com/2012/08/17/learning-from-the-octopus/#commentnuclear would avoid 1 million fatalities per year by 2050 compared with coal: https://judithcurry.com/2012/08/17/learning-from-the-octopus/#comment-231867
Nuclear is about the safest of all electricity generation technologies: http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/06/deaths-by-energy-source-in-forbes.html
«It's about new technology, and people's attitudes - we want to give a proper voice to the nuclear discussion,» said Fenton, who I spoke with via Skype this morning, and who believes that nuclear along with renewables will help mitigate the global warming consequences of CO2 - spewing fossil fuels.
But for the first time in several years, I'm actually reasonably upbeat about a nuclear power technology.
Development organisations that focus on energy issues should stay informed about the progress these countries are making on nuclear and should consider the technology in their ongoing discussions around options for increased energy access.
Speaking enthusiastically about advanced pebble bed nuclear technologies he saw in China, Rogers essentially advocated investment in technology innovation.
Belfer Center experts frequently research and write about energy technology, nuclear energy, biofuels, and sustainable energy.
*** The most astonishing thing about Alan Finkel's report on Australia's electricity market calamity, is that the only stand - alone, CO2 emissions free generation source — nuclear power — barely rates a mention and gets dismissed as if it were some far fetched technology used by aliens.
If you care about climate change, nothing is more important than developing the nuclear technologies we will need to get that job done.
For instance, as I pointed out in my review of Mark Lynas's book, The God Species, the book, and his newly - found support for GM technology and nuclear power did not reveal anything about what drove the more orthodox - green Lynas.
In calculations for Slate, Michael Shellenberger, one of the founders of the «ecomodernist» philosophy that advocates for a technology - focused approach to tackling climate change that includes support for nuclear power, figured out that «under Sanders» proposal to not re-license nuclear plants, U.S. carbon emissions would increase by a minimum of 2 billion tons, about the same amount as the U.S. produces each year making electricity.»
Whatever your views are about nuclear energy, and mine were very negative for most of my life, we are in desperate need of powerful and scalable clean - energy technologies if we are to avert a climate catastrophe.
«The European Union will spend about 700 million euros ($ 900 million) to build the world's most powerful lasers, technology that could destroy nuclear waste and provide new cancer treatments.»
I've seen nuclear scientists on Reddit before answering questions about Thorium reactor technology, and stating in no unclear terms that it is not currently feasible.
If the mix of energy technologies cheap, powerful and acceptable enough to bring this shift about includes one or more of solar, nuclear fusion or nuclear fission (and who, seriously, thinks it won't?)
Clean Energy Technologies Can Return CO2 to Safe Levels This Century Though current atmospheric carbon dioxide levels of about 385 parts per million are already above the revised safe level of 350ppm being promoted by scientists, Kharecha said that it is still possible to return them to safe levels by the end of this century if we engage in «Herculean» efforts to shift towards renewable energy sources, increase the use of nuclear power, and apply carbon sequestration technologies on existing coal power plants.
The report, «Taking on Big Challenges,» details the progress of Ecomagination (first covered here, with subsequent updates about cheap hydrogen production and nuclear power), GE's commitment to imagine and build innovative technologies that help customers address their environmental and financial needs and help GE grow, and it appears to be a success on all fronts.
I'm one of those not crazy about nuclear, as you can see from my comments, but have no problem with pilot plants being built with new technology if what you say is true.
Here is the noted physicist Freeman Dyson writing on a related issue in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: subscription required: (The article is mostly about the dangers of nuclear and biological warfare technology, but the BAS issue «Approaching Midnight» also addresses climate.
We can talk about implementing renewables and nuclear and improved energy efficiency technologies from here until Sunday, but when you put the numbers in, they won't do the job alone.
«R&D on advanced technologies, including thorium reactors with the potential to ameliorate remaining concerns about nuclear power, was stifled, seemingly because it was too promising.
The Obama Administration has been pretty upfront about its support for an energy policy that promotes both clean energy technologies and renewed investment in old technologies such as nuclear, coal and offshore drilling.
The Pugwash conferences were conceived in the 1950s as a forum for scientists concerned about the global security implications of emerging technologies, namely nuclear energy.
I will also post some notes on stuff connecting ideas about advanced technology and strategy (conventional and nuclear) including notes from the single best book on nuclear strategy, Payne's The Great American Gamble: deterrence theory and practice from the Cold War to the twenty - first century.