4e generation nuclear reactor

[Cuicui]

It is precisely the wealthy privileged who seek at all the energy at low cost to continue their exactions and the maintenance of their dominations.
Historically, thermodynamics has replaced the old slave.
The solution lies in a complete overhaul of our lifestyles and in the exponential renunciation of consumption.

I prefer thermodynamics to slavery. Living in misery as my grandparents do not interest me. If you're tempted, do not be embarrassed.
How do you plan to proceed to "recast our lifestyles"? Consumption will be exponential as long as the basic needs of the world's poor are not met. When everyone has enough, there is no reason to have more than enough. If electricity and fuel were 5 times cheaper, I wouldn't consume more current and drive more than now, because I think it's still too expensive. I have what I need and like to live economically, which is not possible when you are too poor.

[sen-no-sen]

Consumption will be exponential as long as the basic needs of the world's poor are not met.

Can you further this statement Stp?

When everyone has enough, there is no reason to have more than enough.

You should take a closer look at the society in which we live ...
The more we have, the more we want.
At the time of my parents having a moped was a luxury, now it is "normal" to have passed your license and to have a car sometimes from the age of 18.
Addiction to consumption theoretically limits only technical possibilities and physical resources.
One only has to look at the oil emirs to realize that the thirst for possession is never filled.

All sociological studies show that as purchasing power increases, consumption increases proportionally.
Take a closer look at the sales statistics of swimming pools, jet skis, trips abroad ...

If electricity and fuel were 5 cheaper, I would not consume more power and run more than I do now, because I think it's still too expensive.

Unfortunately everyone does not have your wisdom, if the price of fuel was divided by 5, the vehicles would be much bigger and we would count more obese (American model)!

I have what I need and like to live in the economy, which is not possible when one is too poor.

The "destitute" are generally poor following the consequences of exponential growth: unemployment, exclusion, famine.
The current model meets simple mathematical standards: the collected samples can not benefit all without a destruction of the biosphere, so it is necessary that a majority deprives itself for a minority consumes in view of the blocks of dominance historically constituted .

I prefer thermodynamics to slavery. Living in misery as my grandparents do not interest me.

It's rhetoric way C.Allegre: growth or death!
Given the current technical means we can benefit from thermodynamics in a reasoned way without falling into the return to slavery, why want to do all or nothing?
On the other hand, if we are not careful, the pursuit of unlimited growth risks leading us towards totalitarian drift and the return to some form of slavery is not excluded!

How do you plan to proceed to "recast our lifestyles"

The recasting will be of itself, and probably in pain after successive consciences.
When scientists talk about a drastic reduction in GHGs, they only indirectly suggest decay.

[Ahmed]

Sen-no-sen, you write:

... few authors, let's say "classic", dare to confront the dragon of growth and its obscure origins, so powerful is this dogma!

Aristotle said that man is a political animal, but he is also a religious animal; currently, its religion is the economy, capitalism is renamed "development" and growth is its thermometer, to question growth is blasphemous!
Of course, growth is not a simple mania, something that would be enough to put aside by a voluntarist act; it is at the heart of the system that precisely determines our social relations.

Chirp, you write:

When everyone has enough, there is no reason to have more than enough.

Adam Smith, the "father" of liberalism, understood that it was not real needs that motivated men to accumulate; he observed that a fraction of the activity of his time was more than enough to meet the basic needs of his fellow citizens.
It is true that the physical needs are limited, but what stands out from the desire is endless, because each desire, diverted from its true nature, can find only successive frustrations in the gross substitutes of the consumption ... which itself is only the second obligatory phase of the form-work.

[Cuicui]

Consumption will be exponential as long as the basic needs of the world's poor are not met.

Can you further this statement Stp?

When everyone has enough, there is no reason to have more than enough.

At the time of my parents having a moped was a luxury, now it is "normal" to have passed your license and to have a car sometimes from the age of 18.
Addiction to consumption theoretically limits only technical possibilities and physical resources.
One only has to look at the oil emirs to realize that the thirst for possession is never filled.

As long as basic needs (food, shelter, education, health, information) are not available for the entire human population, production will have to increase. However, when everyone is equipped, there is no reason to have more than enough. Peugeot is struggling to sell its cars because almost everyone has a car and can not drive several at the same time.
Those who froze in winter on a bike or moped enjoy the comfort of a heated car, and that's good, especially for those with health problems. But most motorists are also aware that a luxurious and expensive car has more disadvantages than advantages, and that modest models make the same services for less. Aside from a few crazy elites who can spend without counting, people are much more reasonable than you seem to think with, in my opinion, some contempt. To believe that you do not know what it is to live in a modest environment where it is not easy to make ends meet.
To return to energy, we have a free and unlimited energy on a human scale: the sun. Everyone is free to capture it as he wants and this does not seem to cause economic upheaval.
When you talk about power stations at Z-pinch, you immediately talk about free and unlimited energy. Why ?
If you do not like clean nuclear, you will have dirty nuclear. There are currently investors financing the construction of new uranium fission power plants that are currently more profitable for them than renewable energy. Thank you for them and too bad for the planet!

[Woodcutter]

I prefer thermodynamics to slavery. Living in misery as my grandparents do not interest me. [...]

Your grandparents lived in misery?

What is "misery" for you?

For my part, and it is the same for all the people that I know of my generation, our grandparents lived much more simply than us certainly, knew the war certainly, but they did not live "in misery"!

Simply, they worked more and cared for their children with much less means and travel than now ...

[sen-no-sen]

As long as basic needs (food, shelter, education, health, information) are not available for the entire human population, production will have to increase.

It is a statement with serious consequences!
Considering that there has never been so much wealth produced ... and that there has never been so much misery in numbers (almost 1 billion people suffer from hunger), so it goes must loot all the resources of the planets until the last plankton to be able to consider that everyone can eat correctly ... and then die, since there will be nothing left?

This is clearly demonstrated, the current production would feed 10 billion people, nowadays the problem lies in the distribution of resources not in the increase of the levies.
We can make the same remarks concerning the habitat, the education etc ...

However, when everyone is equipped, there is no reason to have more than enough.

It is also a worthless claim.
What is "having more than enough"?
What standards will you need to put in place? A Chinese, French, American standards?
There is a physical impossibility to standardize the consumption model French (current) for example.

Those who froze in winter on a bike or moped enjoy the comfort of a heated car,

In moped we freeze, it's clear, but not on bike, I love it!
It is impossible that everyone has access to the automobile, it is necessary to rationalize transport.

Aside from a few crazy elites who can spend without counting, people are much more reasonable than you seem to think with, in my opinion, some contempt.

I do not despise, I see that the standards of consumption is considerably increase (the word is weak), I invent nothing, all studies on consumption confirm my words.

What is the average size of a TV screen in 1960? 1980? 2012?

"The always more" has also become a powerful engine of social exclusion ...

To believe that you do not know what it is to live in a modest environment where it is not easy to make ends meet.

Believe me that you are speaking to the wrong person ... I have known the restaurants of the younger heart, and not as a donor ...

When you talk about power stations at Z-pinch, you immediately talk about free and unlimited energy. Why ?

I spoke of unlimited energy on a human scale, not free.
A mastery of the merger would allow access to very large amounts of energy at relatively low costs.

This would have the effect of stopping any effort of sobriety.
We live at a time when we are at the edges of several "peaks" and yet we practice mismanagement, by what pass would we become sober by having almost infinite resources?

[Cuicui]

[This would have the consequence of stopping any effort at sobriety. We live at a time when we are at the edges of several "peaks" and yet we practice mismanagement, by what pass would we become sober by having almost infinite resources?

I agree with you for a redistribution of wealth giving everyone the means to work for a minimum standard of living (food, shelter, health, education, information) does not necessarily correspond to any standard.
A big screen at home when the view begins to fall is not necessarily a luxury. This could be done more economically with a miniature overhead projector or other process still to be invented.
The uranium fission or fossil fuel nuclear power plants + the renewable energies already produce an energy in some way unlimited since superior to our needs. This does not necessarily make us wasteful. Humans can recognize their mistakes, use their cars less if they want to breathe cleaner air or waste time in traffic jams or simply save money, eat less meat or use less pesticides when they realize their behavior has more disadvantages than advantages.
I do not understand why you think the electricity generated by the Z-pinch plants should be cheap. Can you explain to me? The real advantage of these plants is that unlike uranium fission plants, they perfectly complement the fluctuations of renewable energies because they can be started or stopped instantly without polluting and without depleting natural resources.

[Cuicui]

What is "misery" for you?
For my part, and it is the same for all the people that I know of my generation, our grandparents lived much more simply than us certainly, knew the war certainly, but they did not live "in misery"!
Simply, they worked more and cared for their children with much less means and travel than now ...

For me, the misery is to go out in winter to look for dead wood under the snow because there is nothing more to heat. It is 3 km each morning in hooves to make 10 h at the factory for a very low salary, without paid holidays and family allowances. They had enough to eat and pay for the oil from their lamps, but not much more.
So much the better for your grand parents if they did not know that.

[moinsdewatt]

[..... I did not understand why you think the power generated by the Z-pinch plants should be cheap. Can you explain to me? The real advantage of these plants is that unlike uranium fission plants, they perfectly complement the fluctuations of renewable energies because they can be started or stopped instantly without polluting and without depleting natural resources.

All this is completely speculative.
We do not know anything about the US program on Z-pinch.
Le Department of Energy United States says nothing above.
So it's not worth the delirium.

[Cuicui]

All this is completely speculative.
We do not know anything about the US program on Z-pinch.
Le Department of Energy United States says nothing above.
So it's not worth the delirium.

I am not interested in the US program, but the French program, currently down, the credits being unnecessarily monopolized by ITER and MEGAJOULES.