Heat wave: decrease in nuclear production

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79323
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11043




by Christophe » 17/05/11, 01:10

The lack of water in spring 2011 does not bode well for the nuclear side:

Macro wrote:Come on, we get fucked up a little or two with us ???

http://ecologie.blog.lemonde.fr/2011/05 ... nucleaires


(taken from https://www.econologie.com/forums/accident-n ... 10579.html )

Read also: https://www.econologie.com/centrales-nuc ... -3101.html
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 17/05/11, 02:07

The last drought in 1976, had started similar in February, March and lasted until the beginning of August, not a drop of water, the grass was yellow everywhere without anything green on the ground, all roasted, except the trees, but there were very few nuclear power plants in operation at the time !!

Unless it is Russian manipulation:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55385412/Russ ... sunami-WMD
http://www.infowars.com/secret-weather- ... politican/
who sent us the Russian heat of last year to our home ???

The past history is full of worse droughts.
We should avoid air conditioning and use the cool of winter stored naturally in the soil easily usable with holes in the ground instead of nuclear power plants !!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79323
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11043




by Christophe » 17/05/11, 10:08

A bit paranoid your docs there right?

On the Artic Sea, it is still unclear but the most realistic hypothesis raised by the experts is a large delivery of Russian weapons for Hama or Palestine via the Magreb ...

Currently, really, there is no need for (direct I mean) human intervention for the climate to no longer follow "models".

About climate change: we can't predict 15 days and we would like to predict 50 or 100 years ... I'm kidding!

May these events, which are still localized and fairly minor *, open our eyes (and our hearts) so that we can react again in time !!

It will take a few more years ...

* compared to a major planetary catastrophe (the wealth that we create largely erases the damage of these disasters)
0 x
User avatar
highfly-addict
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 757
Registration: 05/03/08, 12:07
Location: Pyrenees, 43 years
x 7




by highfly-addict » 17/05/11, 11:09

Christophe wrote:...
About climate change: we can't predict 15 days and we would like to predict 50 or 100 years ... I'm kidding! ...


: Shock: You would not compare pickles with sardines by confusing weather and climate by chance? : Idea:
0 x
"God laughs at those who deplore the effects of which they cherish the causes" BOSSUET
"We see what we believes"Dennis MEADOWS
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79323
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11043




by Christophe » 17/05/11, 11:18

Yes but no because what interests people is the weather ... very local from home.

In other words: what will he do with TIME at ME in 30 or 50 years?

I'm just saying that we're in the dark about predicting long-term climate in terms of local impacts!

We saw it well with the December cold wave: we had a lot more snow than usual and polar winds for 2 or 3 years in winter, as I had never felt!

This is due to warming (modified polar albedo = polar winds over Europe).

It's climate BA BA but I had never heard of it! So question: what climate model developed in recent years predicted this? Because it's not a 50-year scale but a 5-year scale, it's "just not the same" as Janco would say. So climate or weather?

In short, nobody knows anything precisely: but it's very difficult to admit it!

So when a climate expert (who holds his position a priori) still dares to say publicly: the climate naturally fluctuates, human responsibility is not (yet) established, he simply lies ...

Intellectual honesty requires prudence, and at best neutrality, is it so hard to say "we don't know" in French?

ps: I have always been astonished by the strong TV audience of the weather and the widespread devastation about the climate ...
0 x
User avatar
highfly-addict
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 757
Registration: 05/03/08, 12:07
Location: Pyrenees, 43 years
x 7




by highfly-addict » 17/05/11, 11:59

Christophe wrote:Yes but no because what interests people is the weather ... very local from home.

In other words: what will he do with TIME at ME in 30 or 50 years?
.

Yes but no but YES! Wanting to cause weather (weather) at times greater than 10-15 days is simply fanciful.

I'm just saying that we're in the dark about predicting long-term climate in terms of local impacts!


Yes, local weather impacts are unpredictable: it's meteorology, not climatology.

We saw it well with the December cold wave: we had a lot more snow than usual and polar winds for 2 or 3 years in winter, as I had never felt!

This is due to warming (modified polar albedo = polar winds over Europe).


That is ONE of the possible explanations, I have heard others very convincing (exceptional phase period between the Nina and the oscillation of the polar front for example ...).

It's climate BA BA but I had never heard of it! So question: what climate model developed in recent years predicted this? Because it's not a 50-year scale but a 5-year scale, it's "just not the same" as Janco would say. So climate or weather?


Weather! Because, precisely, climate models do not "work" on deadlines as short as 5 years!

In short, nobody knows anything precisely: but it's very difficult to admit it!


Any good climatologist will easily concede that he is unable to predict whether the summer of 2027 will be scorching or not, he is talking about CLIMATE, therefore statistics and data averaged over long periods (10 years and many more).

So when a climate expert (who holds his position a priori) still dares to say publicly: the climate naturally fluctuates, human responsibility is not (yet) established, he simply lies ...


Don't see the report, who are you talking about? Because it seems to me that the majority of climatologists agree ...

Intellectual honesty requires prudence, and at best neutrality, is it so hard to say "we don't know" in French?


No, and as said above, regarding the weather forecasts, beyond 10-15 days, no one claims to know it.

ps: I have always been astonished by the strong TV audience of the weather and the widespread devastation about the climate ...


Because precisely the weather is very concrete now and the climate is statistics in the distant future (on the scale of Mr. Everyone).
0 x
"God laughs at those who deplore the effects of which they cherish the causes" BOSSUET

"We see what we believes"Dennis MEADOWS
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79323
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11043




by Christophe » 17/05/11, 12:18

highflyaddict wrote:Don't see the report, who are you talking about? Because it seems to me that the majority of climatologists agree ...


I have in mind his multiple interviews with meteofrance engineers who, after almost every "exceptional" event: rains, storms, drought (events which become less and less exceptional because more and more frequent) systematically exonerate human responsibility. in the climate by saying that the link was not established ... Of course ...

It is a partisan and dangerous position because it does not go in the direction of awareness of people ... but it has changed a bit for some time!

To say that we do not know, that it is possible that this is a consequence of climate change, that we must be careful (etc ...) in the mouth of a weather engineer on TV, I do not NEVER HEARD ...
0 x
Alain G
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3044
Registration: 03/10/08, 04:24
x 3




by Alain G » 17/05/11, 13:35

Should send you rain and cold because here it does not stop raining and the richelieu river which drains lake Champlain in the USA does not want to drop!

It was 4 C again last night and 6 C yesterday, we still have to heat the house!

Not global warming here! : Evil:
0 x
Stepping behind sometimes can strengthen friendship.
Criticism is good if added to some compliments.
Alain
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79323
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11043




by Christophe » 17/05/11, 14:07

Nice info Alain, "we" had yet been promised that the drop in the Gulf Stream would have the opposite effect: warmer in America, colder in Europe ...

Which proves that nobody understands anything with certainty about climate!

Oh sorry, it's weather not climate ... hihihih! (I take it with humor but it doesn't make me laugh at all ...)
0 x
Alain G
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3044
Registration: 03/10/08, 04:24
x 3




by Alain G » 17/05/11, 14:41

http://argent.canoe.ca/lca/affaires/que ... 70315.html

The victims of the Richelieu River will have no choice but to dip into their wallets to find the comfort they enjoyed before the flooding of their property. Insurers do not reimburse for damage caused by floods and the Government of Quebec only pays for essential goods.
Photo: QMI Agency

Richelieu victims cannot claim money from their insurance company to pay for home renovations or the purchase of new furniture, as insurers in the country never reimburse for damage caused by floods.

“Our rivers overflow every spring! It's not insured because it's predictable, ”said Jack Chadirdjan, director of public affairs for the Insurance Bureau of Canada.

There are, however, some exceptions. Damage to motor vehicles is reimbursed even if it was caused by a flood.

Personal property, televisions and sofas in particular, are reimbursed by insurance companies if the water, which has seeped into the basement, comes from a sewer backup.

To obtain this compensation, the owners of the 3000 homes flooded near the Richelieu River will have to demonstrate that it was not the flood that caused the backflow.




http://fr-ca.actualites.yahoo.com/nivea ... 3QD;_ylv=3

With the rain precipitation that continues this morning over southern Quebec, the problematic water levels on Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River will rise again during the day.

The Quebec Flood Forecasting Center released its latest assessment of the situation at 5 a.m. on Tuesday morning and said it expected today to raise levels on these two rivers by almost 10 centimeters. The CPCQ also clarified this morning that since the start of the new rise, water levels have risen 17 centimeters in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and 18 centimeters in St-Armand.

The authorities therefore recommend that residents living near these watercourses take the necessary precautions immediately and follow the next bulletins.

Flood alerts are maintained on Tuesday for Lake Champlain, the entire Richelieu River, Lake Saint-Pierre and the Châteauguay River near Huntingdon.

Heavy flood warnings were issued for the entire Châteauguay River as well as for the Yamaska ​​River. On these rivers, heavy floods are caused by last hour precipitation. The CPCQ maintains that runoff is currently very strong in the Châteauguay river basin and that it has been up 240 centimeters for 54 hours. However, the water levels should stabilize during the morning.

Flood watches have also been issued for the English, Brochet, Acadie (mouth), Huron (mouth) rivers as well as for all small rivers with a mouth in the Richelieu River.



3000 houses flooded and it has been going on for three weeks!
0 x
Stepping behind sometimes can strengthen friendship.

Criticism is good if added to some compliments.

Alain

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 172 guests