There will be an improvement of course. That kind of thinking is why the USA still uses imperial after 200 years of the metric system.
There will be an improvement of course. That kind of thinking is why the USA still uses imperial after 200 years of the metric system.
You have to do that anyway.
Well, in that case, nobody cares about what you want to say, either.
The fourth power equation you’re talking about is weight per axle. A semi truck will weigh much more in total. But the difference in weight per axle isn’t as high as you seem to think.
and they can’t track you if you have a blank user agent.
They absolutely can. A blank user agent is a fingerprint like any other.
socialist prime minister
That’s a bit of a stretch, he may be Socialist Party, but most of the policies of his government have been practically neoliberal.
A reminder (that really shouldn’t be needed) that collective punishment is a war crime.
Probably pretty good on a barbecue, from all the fat.
Take it from the fossil fuel subsidies.
Sure, but it’s still thousands. From Cambridge dictionary:
the thousands
numbers between 1,000 and 1,000,000
1200 is thousands. 1.2 thousands, to be specific.
Works perfectly on mine.
Who are you talking to? That was my first comment here.
Ah yes, what could go wrong with doing things the way they were done in the past?
So, again, if those three examples are what you mean by catastrophic failure, then my assumption was correct. None of them were due to maintenance failures or being in service too long. Catastrophic failure is not a failure mode for a modern reactor past its service life.
Can’t forget about y’all’dnt’ve.
You said catastrophic failure in the same context as loss of life and land. That is what I was responding to, and it is incorrect.
The pressure that the metals of the reactor are put under from the radiation is a real thing, it causes damage and fatigue.
Yes.
they’re decommissioned because if you keep them running they’ll have catastrophic failures, which besides the loss of life and land
No. This is the fearmongering part. A nuclear plant that is past its service life doesn’t just turn into Chernobyl.
I don’t know what article you’re talking about, but I’m pretty sure it won’t trump my years of university education on this.
all need to be decommissioned at some point, because they will fail catastrophically if they don’t.
This is false, that idea comes from decades of anti-science fearmongering. They need to be decommissioned for the same reasons as everything else, they just become too expensive to maintain. Same as every other energy source, including renewables.
Just to clarify, the one that said that is actually one of the oldest far right parties in the country, not one of those that just popped up.