Personally, I have always been against nuclear energy, because it is not safe in m.o. and there is still no solution for the waste and the fact that it is used as a weapon. But of course that applies to almost all technology:(
Last month a melt down proof nuclear power plant was invented by China. The cooling is done by pebbles. Back to the Stone Age :)
Yes, much was done wrong with nuclear power at its outset. Today's science allows all the fuel to be burnt so there's no waste. And with other cooling systems, meltdowns will disappear. The small portable power stations Rosatom's developed are excellent for use in remote locations where building an energy support infrastructure would cause more ecological damage and cost many Xs more.
Is all the waste being burned these days? I’m not aware of that. That is certainly a lot of improvement. I think I’ve dropped out after the stories of rusty barrels in salt mines that will be radioactive for thousands of years to come.
The new reactors are made to utilize the waste, which is treated/modified so it can be burnt as fuel. The problem arises because only Rosatom is making those 4th Generation reactors. The Outlaw US Empire has lots of potential fuel, but can you imagine Rosatom being allows to build a series of reactors here?
I'd imagine there were a number of initial attempts but the cost and finding backers forced many to cancel their projects. I'm not surprised the Lawerence-Livermore facility in California is where the only US project's located; I lived in close proximity and visited the lab on a field trip 50+ years ago.
At the last deep discussion about the economy Putin provided the stats at the halfway point with GDP growth about 5.5%, and the second half in Russia is almost always better that the first half. Inflation remains under control; wages are rising; output in all sectors is increasing, and technological sovereignty closing in on 95%. There's plenty of money and facilities available to help those suddenly displaced by the Kursk assault. EU residents saw their gas prices spike as a result. EU still remains connected to Russian energy.
Germany is supposedly still a high-tech country. But wherever you look in Europe, there is a decline, a lack of quality, a shortage of skilled workers due to a very poor education system and, compared to China, Germany is already a developing country. The USA is still the technological leader in some areas. But in more and more areas, the USA is being overtaken by China. The West is blindly sanctioning half the world and with the coming intensification of the economic war against China, the Western countries are shooting themselves in the head. After shooting themselves in the foot with the economic war against Russia.
Russia receives little mention in the high-tech sector. Wrongly so. I wish there were more publications on this topic. Russia has excellent conditions for developing a high-tech industry. Family policy, social policy, education system, raw materials and energy resources, etc. Russia has a problem with demography and the development of modern infrastructure in this huge country is a gigantic task.
Here is an exciting conversation.
"China prepares for Collective West sanctions attack"
I don't seem to recall any Western government doing long term planning except for war at anytime over the last 500 years. The USA has never had an industrial policy, and its Commerce Department is more a collector of statistics. One exception was to be HUD--housing and urban development--that was the primary cornerstone of LBJ's Great Society Program that was essentially still-born. It was supposed to be tasked with rebuilding America's cities, ridding them of the slums and tenements remaining from the 19th Century and perform planned development of the sort I grew up experiencing in Davis, California. Seattle's 1962 World's Fair with its interurban monorail mass transit and the related attractions at Disneyland's Tomorrowland exhibits were supposed to be the template for what was to come but never materialized because war making and planning trumped all others and still does. Furthermore, as I recall every five and ten-year plan proposed by the socialist nations were always derided and all such planning deemed anti-capitalistic and still is today.
Australia's Ben Chifley put Australia on the road to industrialise with state direction, ditto the Commonwealth Bank, which was once a people's bank. There used to be many capable public servants who shared this vision. The events of the second world war and depression focused minds on the deficits of relying on private interests as economic drivers, ditto unfettered banks.
The old guard of the Labor party was phased out in Bob Hawke's administration with fully neo-liberal policies in place by 1987. The combined west sowed the wind and is now reaping the whirlwind - There Is No Alternative (TINA).
Clinton Fernandes book, "Sub-Imperial Power", is a recent exposition of the US pacific deputies role in the Asia/Pacific. As US proxies go there's the eternal debate on how much autonomy each satellite exerts steering its course.
Thank you Karl,
Personally, I have always been against nuclear energy, because it is not safe in m.o. and there is still no solution for the waste and the fact that it is used as a weapon. But of course that applies to almost all technology:(
Last month a melt down proof nuclear power plant was invented by China. The cooling is done by pebbles. Back to the Stone Age :)
Https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/china-nuclear-reactor-power-plant-meltdown-proof-b2586374.html
Yes, much was done wrong with nuclear power at its outset. Today's science allows all the fuel to be burnt so there's no waste. And with other cooling systems, meltdowns will disappear. The small portable power stations Rosatom's developed are excellent for use in remote locations where building an energy support infrastructure would cause more ecological damage and cost many Xs more.
In terms of green transformation I hope we follow China’s line more.
https://xueyingyingxue.substack.com/p/breaking-china-releases-comprehensive?utm_campaign=reaction&utm_medium=email&utm_source=substack&utm_content=post
Is all the waste being burned these days? I’m not aware of that. That is certainly a lot of improvement. I think I’ve dropped out after the stories of rusty barrels in salt mines that will be radioactive for thousands of years to come.
The new reactors are made to utilize the waste, which is treated/modified so it can be burnt as fuel. The problem arises because only Rosatom is making those 4th Generation reactors. The Outlaw US Empire has lots of potential fuel, but can you imagine Rosatom being allows to build a series of reactors here?
The University of Rochester (NY) started a laser fusion project in the eighties.
If there were any results worth knowing I might have heard some.
I'd imagine there were a number of initial attempts but the cost and finding backers forced many to cancel their projects. I'm not surprised the Lawerence-Livermore facility in California is where the only US project's located; I lived in close proximity and visited the lab on a field trip 50+ years ago.
Nuclear submarines and underwater drones as well - although I do not suppose that RF cares to sell this level of technology
As for the rest they must pull up the videos - this in action yesterday - see how.....etc
You mention RF economic expansion at 5/6% this year - have you any links, please
At the last deep discussion about the economy Putin provided the stats at the halfway point with GDP growth about 5.5%, and the second half in Russia is almost always better that the first half. Inflation remains under control; wages are rising; output in all sectors is increasing, and technological sovereignty closing in on 95%. There's plenty of money and facilities available to help those suddenly displaced by the Kursk assault. EU residents saw their gas prices spike as a result. EU still remains connected to Russian energy.
Thank you Karl, I missed this VVP remark
Escobar linked to this interesting weighing of national economies, https://t.me/infodefENGLAND/22833
Another yardstick.
Many thanks for this, very useful information
Germany is supposedly still a high-tech country. But wherever you look in Europe, there is a decline, a lack of quality, a shortage of skilled workers due to a very poor education system and, compared to China, Germany is already a developing country. The USA is still the technological leader in some areas. But in more and more areas, the USA is being overtaken by China. The West is blindly sanctioning half the world and with the coming intensification of the economic war against China, the Western countries are shooting themselves in the head. After shooting themselves in the foot with the economic war against Russia.
Russia receives little mention in the high-tech sector. Wrongly so. I wish there were more publications on this topic. Russia has excellent conditions for developing a high-tech industry. Family policy, social policy, education system, raw materials and energy resources, etc. Russia has a problem with demography and the development of modern infrastructure in this huge country is a gigantic task.
Here is an exciting conversation.
"China prepares for Collective West sanctions attack"
The Duran
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=egzN9PUMU38
I don't seem to recall any Western government doing long term planning except for war at anytime over the last 500 years. The USA has never had an industrial policy, and its Commerce Department is more a collector of statistics. One exception was to be HUD--housing and urban development--that was the primary cornerstone of LBJ's Great Society Program that was essentially still-born. It was supposed to be tasked with rebuilding America's cities, ridding them of the slums and tenements remaining from the 19th Century and perform planned development of the sort I grew up experiencing in Davis, California. Seattle's 1962 World's Fair with its interurban monorail mass transit and the related attractions at Disneyland's Tomorrowland exhibits were supposed to be the template for what was to come but never materialized because war making and planning trumped all others and still does. Furthermore, as I recall every five and ten-year plan proposed by the socialist nations were always derided and all such planning deemed anti-capitalistic and still is today.
Australia's Ben Chifley put Australia on the road to industrialise with state direction, ditto the Commonwealth Bank, which was once a people's bank. There used to be many capable public servants who shared this vision. The events of the second world war and depression focused minds on the deficits of relying on private interests as economic drivers, ditto unfettered banks.
The old guard of the Labor party was phased out in Bob Hawke's administration with fully neo-liberal policies in place by 1987. The combined west sowed the wind and is now reaping the whirlwind - There Is No Alternative (TINA).
Thanks for that info. I've been sharing this excellent, informative yet long read that's led me to other leads, https://monthlyreview.org/2024/07/01/imperialism-in-the-indo-pacific-an-introduction/
Clinton Fernandes book, "Sub-Imperial Power", is a recent exposition of the US pacific deputies role in the Asia/Pacific. As US proxies go there's the eternal debate on how much autonomy each satellite exerts steering its course.
For a concise take on the current PM's shock and response to Paul Keating's rebuke of Australia's government's continuing slide into abject subservience there's the article at Pearls and Irritations, https://johnmenadue.com/a-timid-pm-frozen-in-the-glare-of-the-keating-headlights/