Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WFTV Orlando)   Consumer rights advocate demands Duke refund $54 million, stop sucking   (wftv.com ) divider line
    More: Florida  
•       •       •

3873 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Jul 2014 at 2:00 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



21 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-07-04 11:47:03 AM  
One is about as likely to happen as the other.
 
2014-07-04 01:31:57 PM  
Asking Duke not to suck is like asking the Sun to not rise
 
2014-07-04 02:08:39 PM  
See, now this situation sounds exactly like what a "Haboob" should be.
It's sorta like a boondoggle, but better cause it has boobs in it.
 
2014-07-04 02:18:54 PM  
They still are the Duke of oil.
 
2014-07-04 02:19:11 PM  
Boy, a little backstory would be nice, reporter person.
 
2014-07-04 02:24:33 PM  
Sorry kids, it takes false rape allegation and mass defamation on the part of the staff to get Duke to cough up any money.
 
2014-07-04 02:35:24 PM  
Also on this page:

Featured Articles: Black Widow loses women's hot dog eating contest

Haven't read it; more fun to parse and speculate.
 
2014-07-04 02:40:35 PM  
cdn.mos.totalfilm.com

"Should we break out the petty cash jar for them, Mortimer?"
 
2014-07-04 02:41:26 PM  
Why did they quit the project?
 
2014-07-04 02:45:59 PM  
It's time we got serious about nuclear.

There needs to be a fast track for building new plants.  Something where there are essentially pre-built reactors sitting on the shelf that can be put in before the NIMBYs have time to even realize what's going on.

And we need to have ready-to-go siting rules for new reactors.  Sane things like "no reactors within X miles of a coast" to protect from hurricane/tsunami damage and "no reactors within X miles of an active fault line"  to prevent earthquake damage.

Oh, and design rules for reactors should require that in the event of complete power loss (which we know can happen, because it has) that a reactor must fail to a safe state, no meltdown capability.  Yes, we have reactor designs that can do exactly that.

But once the site is selected, it needs to be no more than 2 years from the bulldozers rolling in to power generation.  Only an experimental new reactor design should take longer.

Factory-build the components, run a railroad to the site, haul the bits in by rail, and put it together.
 
2014-07-04 02:47:14 PM  
 
2014-07-04 02:57:33 PM  
They did try to corner the frozen orange juice market.
 
2014-07-04 03:02:08 PM  
Only in America do you get to start a project, make consumers pay for it, and never finish it. To boot, the taxpayers are STILL left on the hook for the cost.
 
2014-07-04 03:07:59 PM  

DarkVader: There needs to be a fast track for building new plants. Something where there are essentially pre-built reactors sitting on the shelf that can be put in before the NIMBYs have time to even realize what's going on ... And we need to have ready-to-go siting rules for new reactors ... Factory-build the components, run a railroad to the site, haul the bits in by rail, and put it together.


See: Small modular reactor.  Examples include: Toshiba 4S and B&W mPower.

As their name implies, they're small reactors that can be transported by rail or truck.  In some designs, the reactor module is a sealed maintenance free component that is fueled at the factory and then shipped back for recycling.

One of the benefits of smaller reactors is that you can better distribute your power generation, reducing the demand on long-haul distribution lines.  Just deploy them next to towns to provide base-load power as needed.
 
2014-07-04 03:18:00 PM  

Dinjiin: DarkVader: There needs to be a fast track for building new plants. Something where there are essentially pre-built reactors sitting on the shelf that can be put in before the NIMBYs have time to even realize what's going on ... And we need to have ready-to-go siting rules for new reactors ... Factory-build the components, run a railroad to the site, haul the bits in by rail, and put it together.

See: Small modular reactor.  Examples include: Toshiba 4S and B&W mPower.

As their name implies, they're small reactors that can be transported by rail or truck.  In some designs, the reactor module is a sealed maintenance free component that is fueled at the factory and then shipped back for recycling.

One of the benefits of smaller reactors is that you can better distribute your power generation, reducing the demand on long-haul distribution lines.  Just deploy them next to towns to provide base-load power as needed.


And have the locals go into full vapor lock at the thought of being blown to the moon when the reactor goes critical...


/I know that's BS but the vast majority of people see mushroom clouds when they hear the word "nuclear"
 
2014-07-04 03:38:14 PM  

KidKorporate: Sorry kids, it takes false rape allegation and mass defamation on the part of the staff to get Duke to cough up any money.


Duke Energy raped me in the shower. Or was that Penn State Energy?
 
2014-07-04 04:05:09 PM  

Danger Avoid Death: KidKorporate: Sorry kids, it takes false rape allegation and mass defamation on the part of the staff to get Duke to cough up any money.

Duke Energy raped me in the shower. Or was that Penn State Energy?


It's all energy companies. Don't try to distinguish them.
 
2014-07-04 04:14:45 PM  
"Good luck."
img4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-07-04 04:23:36 PM  
www.sportsstudio.net
 
2014-07-04 04:40:48 PM  

Pribar: And have the locals go into full vapor lock at the thought of being blown to the moon when the reactor goes critical...


Simple solution - require reactor designs that can't have a runaway critical reaction.  They've existed for a couple decades now, and I believe that some of these small modular reactors are built exactly that way.

The complicated part would be undoing 60 years of media saying that all reactors can go critical.
 
2014-07-04 05:27:21 PM  

Dinjiin: Pribar: And have the locals go into full vapor lock at the thought of being blown to the moon when the reactor goes critical...

Simple solution - require reactor designs that can't have a runaway critical reaction.  They've existed for a couple decades now, and I believe that some of these small modular reactors are built exactly that way.

The complicated part would be undoing 60 years of media saying that all reactors can go critical.


You could have a self regenerating, 200 years between refueling reactor that could power New York for a decade on a ounce of uranium reactor whose only waste product was new episodes of my little pony and people would still freak as soon as they heard "nuke"
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report