Scientists Just Built a Battery That Never Needs Charging

[NNadir]

32. Oh, I'm getting a lecture on the laws of thermodynamics, am I? From people advocating no less batteries and...

Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2025, 07:33 AM - Edit history (1)

...worse, hydrogen because the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't always shine?

Really?

One thing about antinukes is that they are a never ending source of comedy, or would be if the fucking planet wasn't burning and the rise of the dangerous fossil fuel waste, which is accelerating at the highest rate ever/b] observed wasn't accelerating:

New Weekly CO2 Concentration Record Set at the Mauna Loa Observatory, 428.38 ppm

But the planet is burning, and the rise of the concentration of the dangerous fossil fuel waste carbon dioxide is accelerating.

Question: From the definition of entropy using a line integral, which produces less entropy, heat exchange at a high temperature, like say, the temperatures in a nuclear fuel, or heat exchange at low temperatures like say, a battery?

Never mind, I really don't want to hear it on a planet burning because people don't understand the basic laws of science.

How about we just do some simple graphs that a 9th grader should be able to do?

Costs:



IEA overview, Energy Investments.

The graphic is interactive at the link; one can calculate overall expenditures on what the IEA dubiously calls "clean energy."

Note we wouldn't need all those fucking expensive grids starting fires if we had reliable energy. They are part of the money squandered by antinukes in their indifference to fossil fuels. It's not just the unreliable solar and wind crap.

In California, the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, with a single power line stretching over the hills, 2 reactors, easily out produces on a 12 acre footprint thousands of square miles of wind turbines, all of which will be landfill in less than 20 years. And all those wires strewn over California to connect all that unreliable soon to rot shit, does it ever occur to antinukes to wonder if all those fires started by sparking wires are really necessary?

Nuclear energy, as reported by one of the world's most prominent climate scientists - and I fully recognize that antinukes couldn't care less about the extreme heating the world is experiencing from fossil fuel waste - saves lives:

Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)

It follows that antinuke rhetoric kills people.

Final math question, assuming that this is certainly not the conversation where a knowledge of the laws of thermodynamics applies, since they've already been mangled: What's bigger, 8 EJ (solar) + 8 EJ (wind) = 16 EJ or 30EJ?



IEA World Energy Outlook 2024
Table A.1a: World energy supply Page 296.

If we want to know why the planet is burning, and the use of fossil fuels - about which antinukes couldn't care less - is rising dramatically, faster than wind and solar combined, it would be useful to understand the laws of physics, including of course, the laws of thermodynamics, and the laws, for that matter, or nuclear physics.

That's not going to happen though. I've been here for more than 20 years and still I hear this stuff. It's stuff that kills people. It's disgusting.

Bye. This is why DU has a wonderful ignore list.