TURKEY POWER

Can we also talk about the way they chose to manipulate the perception of the data by their choice of states
- LOL, it's a reverse population map. Works on the stupid because "lots of orange!"
- There are states with populations higher than 30 million. Like yea that's a lot of people, but the cherry picking of states is annoying
- https://archive.org/details/howtoliewithmaps0000monm

if they claim a 15lb Turkey feeds 12, how am I supposed trust any of the other numbers?
- Or how 1 GW/(200 W/person) came up with a number that started with a 3 instead of a 5. Like 5 million people, not 30 million.
  
  But it only takes 3.5 hours per turkey and a day has 24 of them. So if some people get up at 3am it works out!

I thought this was going to be about how many turkeys you could cook directly using the reactor heat
my disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined
- Be about 3x that number. Reactors are about 33-40% efficient. So a 1000 MW electric plant is running at 3000 MW thermal. Would be relatively easy too. Just a gigantic steam heated oven. So 7.5 million turkeys, enough to feed 90 million people or about a quarter of the US.
  
  I doubt an oven needs 2400W continuous to keep at temperature. Also a single large oven will be far more efficient than 7.5 million separate ovens.
  
  you know what, i am thankful for you
- Glad to know I'm not the only one!

Rookie Numbers. It only uses electrical power generated. Why not cook turkeys in heat destined for cooling towers ? Gotta push those numbers way up.
- Or just toss all the turkeys into the reactor
  
  Restricted sous-vide basin
  
  Turkey control rods

The fun part of this is this is true of any 1GW power source. We have been deploying solar+battery arrays in that range recently for much less money and much faster than nuclear.
Thanks "Office of nuclear energy" for pointing out how useful large scale solar+battery is too!

I really don't get this ackshually business about nuclear power, we're absolute idiots to not employ it more. Everywhere there's been a focus on nuclear power generation we're seeing reliable results over a long long timespan
- Lemmy keeps telling me nuclear power is stupid. I've been screaming for more going on 30-years now. 🤷
  
  Maybe because we still don't have a solution for the waste which kills people generations after your death?
- The problem with nuclear is: business wise, it is a TOUGH sell to the public, even without the anti-nuclear lobby groups fighting with safety propaganda.
  It takes a much higher capital spend to start up nuclear than any other type of plant, so you won't "break even" for 30 plus years, if ever.
  It doesn't help when there are high profile sites that are being refurbished, whose costs are already phenomenaly high, and then the managing firm fucks it up (I'm looking at you Crystal River).
  It makes it high risk, financially. And it's the public that ultimately ends up paying.
  My hope is that SMR's become viable. They introduce a new factor though. If you get small, "cheaper" nuclear plants, then you will get more operators and you will get some that may run fast and loose. One fuck up can ruin it for everyone.
  
  I can accept the argument that it's safe and effective but the public irrationally won't accept it. Seems to have been a pretty good sell on the other side of the curtain though
  
  SMRs also produce significantly more waste for the amount of power generated.
- It's sort of too late for nuclear though. They take years to build and cost a fortune. The time to invest in nuclear power on a large scale was probably 10 years ago (although, was it as safe then? I don't know)... Right now we need answers that get us away from fossil fuels much, much quicker. Nuclear may still be a part of the picture, but renewables are more pressing.
  
  Think beyond your own lifetime
  
  Thing is this has been said for longer than I've been alive, and will probably still be said after I'm dead, in the intervening 70-80 years we could have and could be actually building the damn things.

How is this a meme?

I'd like to see this redone using energy instead of power. E.g is 2,400 watts during the initial heatup or when the oven reaches stable temperature? They're not taking into account the time change either.
- 2400W is typical maximum power for an oven. If you run that continuous you'll have very crispy (black) turkey

Wow, didn't realize how anti-nuclear Lemmy is after looking at this comment thread.
- Common on contrarian and alternative platform as this particular topic has been seeded by russia psyops against russian oil alternative.
  This is why germany shut down all its reactors and went back to burning lignite coal when nordstream was blown up by a ln Ukrainian triggerman.
  
  IIRC Germany shut down their reactors because of Fukushima and the disaster there, not because of psyops.
  
  Germany's exit from nuclear power was decided way back in the early 2010s. When the pipeline was destroyed the last three remaining plants were overdue for maintenance, didn't have any more fuel and also no one to run the plant for significantly longer. They extended the shutdown until spring and that was it. Stop spreading the lie, that this was some kind of rushed decision or that it could have been prolonged much further.
  Building new ones isnt economical and also wouldn't produce any electricity until the late 2030s
  If the exit was a mistake 15 years ago can be debated, but the discussion is worthless now, no matter how often this gets pushed by the party that fucked up the buildup of renewable alternatives in the 16 years they were in power
  
  We didn't this is misinformation spread in USA. Yes we shut down nuclear plants (but the laws fasing out nuclear were made over a decade ago because we still haven't found a solution for the waste, this was all looong before nordstream) and our investments in renewable are behind, but none is planning on going back to coal (except some crazy right wing fascists who are not in political power)
  For the most part we are investing in gas heavily at the moment, which is fucking stupid in our climate situation, but the fracking gas from the USA with very competitive prices and lot of political hegemony from USA drive the government to do it anyway.
- Didn't think people smart enough to use Lemmy would fall for american nuclear lobbying.
  Guys come on you can't really think nuclear is better then renewables and everyone who thinks differently is having an agenda.
  If something like this ends up in my feed I wanna talk to the people and see how they ended up with such "interesting" positions, that's all.
  (For what I can tell most are Americans and influenced by local consent manufacturing)
  
  I wouldn't say nuclear is better than renewables. I would say it's a good at providing base load as we transition from fossil fuels over to renewables. That's all.
  
  Ah yes, the great and powerful American nuclear lobby... That hasn't sold a new reactor in 30 years.
  Most people support nuclear because it's the best base load generation method, and that can't be replaced by renewables.
  You're literally less than a degree of separation from the "nuclear is a Chinese psyop" people.

If people didn't all turn their oven on at the same time but took more of a staggered approach this would supply a lot more people.
- No, it's already wrong even for realistic staggered dinners.
  I think they are using an arbitrary GW-day of energy instead of power, so it can't even come close to making as much turkey as claimed.
  
  They're over by a factor of 6 which would add up to 21 hours, not 24. I don't know what they've done to get 2.5 million, it should be 417 thousand with those numbers.
  Edit: Oh dear. They said each oven could completely cook 6 turkeys in a day so they rounded to that number. At least it no longer reads GW/day.
  The source
- Time zones probably help with that!

The real question is how many nuclear reactors a turkey could cook.

If you cook me a 15lb turkey in 3 1/2 hours that burnt dry shit is going in the trash.
Dude standing by a smoker with 10 lbs of pork ribs for the past 4 hours

A typical turkey feeds 12 people? Doubt. Perhaps enough for 12 portions - but that isn’t the same as 12 people get fed off this one bird.
- I bet half the turkeys cooked go to waste one way or another (ruined while cooking, spoiled leftovers, etc). And people totally overeat.

With Vogtle expansion costing over $15B per gw, that is $6000+ per fed person, before counting the cost of importing uranium from Russia.
- 6000$ to "feed" every X minutes that it takes to microwave to microwave a turkey. This plant cook 2.5 million turkey in parrallel.
- Also without storing the nuclear waste.
  
  or security costs, including the promised good time of civil war that get's floated around.

Now calculate how many generations of turkeys will be eaten till the waste stops killing people
Edit: can't believe how many people here are falling for nuclear. Have you all learned nothing from what companies did with fossil fuels? Taking the profits and leaving humanity with a fucked up world? And now you are falling for the same stuff with nuclear again, I assume this is the discourse in america which is so scewed? Here in Europe people are not that naive... Even the ones in France, which is quite into nuclear are reasonable and see the waste problem normally.
And here on Lemmy people really come and say "nuclear waste isn't dangerous, it didn't kill anyone"
Wtf people?!
- How many people has all the waste we've produced kill up to now?
  
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_by_death_toll
  Quite a few (if you remember not even a fraction oft its life time is over by now)
  Also: radiation doesn't kill right away. Often you live 10 more years with weird symptoms and die from something like heart attack, so your death isn't counted as "caused by radiation exposure" but as "died from cancer" or "heart attack"
- Nuclear waste is indeed a problem, however it is a contained problem that can be isolated. Oil's byproduct are distributed into the atmosphere and are killing every living thing on earth. Do you know how many people die every year due to pollution from burning fossil fuels? It's orders of magnitude worse. The fear of nuclear waste, while absolutely an issue, is so incredibly blown out of proportion compared to the silent killer that is fossil fuels.
  
  You people always come and compare to oil.
  THATS A STRAWMAN NOONE IS ARGUING FOR OIL
  yes short term the rising temp by climate gases is prob worse, but you need to compare it to actual alternatives, like wind, water, sun -.-
  Everyone fucking knowes that oil needs to be stopped from being used better yesterday then today, but this doesn't make nuclear any better
- Things lemmy loves: imperial propaganda, corporate propaganda, genocide, joe and kamala, liberalism, blaming (non)voters, anti-russian racism, etc.
  Still better than reddit.

Corporate propaganda power!

in a country where half of the presidents cant even pronounce nukular....and the only usecase for nukular is make some machines like openAI work cheaper. go eat the nukular waste george.

2.5 Million Turkeys... and 500-1500 cubic meters of impossible to store basically forever radioactive nuclear (LILW) waste😋😋😋
source
- 1500 cubic meters
  Did you really pick the figure from the RBMK reactor type?
  For PWRs, 250 m³ of LILW per GW annum is 28.5 m³ of LILW per TWh.
  2.5 million turkeys in a 2.4 kW oven for 3.5 hours uses 0.021 TWh.
  So 2.5 million turkeys and 0.6 m³ total low and intermediate wastes generated. Most of this can be released after ~300 years with negligible activity over natural background. That is a long time but not "basically forever".
- I'm not sure where they got those numbers.
  All nuclear waste produced to date isn't 500-1500 cubic meters.
  As to storage. Just bury it again. We dug it up, we can bury it. There are a few places that are currently doing just that.
  Or, here a wild idea. Just burn the waste. It's something like 90% unburned fuel, just reprocess it and burn it.
  
  Just burn the waste
  Wouldn't that like... eradiate our whole fucking atmosphere? O.o
  
  The source for that number is the International Atomic Energy Agency aka the nuclear control agency. As for the rest of your ideas, its sadly not that easy. It has to be stored somewhere where it cant contaminate the environment, water cant get to it, tectonics are stable, etc. No permanent storage location for the waste has been found, to date.
  And to burn the unburned fuel you would have to breed the material, which is a process that requires the most dangerous reactors and is extremely costly.
- Yeah, what about the waste, gonna eat that with your Turkey?