XPost: comp.os.linux.misc, alt.politics, alt.economy   
   XPost: talk.politics.misc   
   From: tnp@invalid.invalid   
      
   On 06/11/2024 21:41, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:   
   > On 11/6/24 6:11 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:   
   >> On 06/11/2024 00:26, rbowman wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:38:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 05/11/2024 20:31, Charlie Gibbs wrote:   
   >>>>> On the other hand, I recently re-worked a summary report program to   
   >>>>> build the entire table in memory and spew it out after all input files   
   >>>>> had been read, because I realized that these days, given the finite   
   >>>>> volume of data I'm working with, I effectively _do_  have unlimited   
   >>>>> memory.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I have a friend who does maths research, involving operations on   
   >>>> gigantic matrices.   
   >>>> His original code, some of which is assembler to access some obscure   
   >>>> INTEL instructions to do with vector maths, was designed to use 128GB.   
   >>>> On someone else's extremely expensive computer in a far away land.   
   >>>> That is no longer an option, and he spent last week rewriting it to   
   >>>> suit   
   >>>> the biggest motherboard he can easily obtain.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Typically a run takes several months. The power usage on the   
   >>>> computer is   
   >>>> about 500W.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So people can still find ways to push the limits of computers.   
   >>>   
   >>> AI is great for that. You know you're in trouble when companies are   
   >>> trying   
   >>> to buy nuclear plants to keep the lights in in the computing centers.   
   >>>   
   >> Frankly I regard that as pure serendipity.   
   >> The world needs nuclear power in unheard of quantities, and if AI is   
   >> the trigger to start that avalanche, I dont care if in the end its   
   >> utterly pointless.   
   >>   
   >> The nuclear power stations will still be there. and usable   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> It doesn't get as much mention yet but all that energy eventually   
   >>> becomes   
   >>> heat. Is the answer something like the Seabrook nuke where you can   
   >>> use the   
   >>> Atlantic to keep the processors cool? When they were building   
   >>> Seabrook one   
   >>> of the spins was that the lobsters would love their cozy new homes.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Yes. There is a distinct change in species near the outfalls of   
   >> coastal reactors - but its the same for any thermal power plant -   
   >> aside from CCGT..   
   >>   
   >> 60% of  the energy ends up as low grade heat. (Its more like 30% on a   
   >> CCGT but no one is talking about efficient uses of Uranium via a tow   
   >> stage gas/steam turbine setup yet). Its dirt cheap and plentiful. So   
   >> waste heat it will be.   
   >>   
   >> But there are more ways of using low grade heat than spaffing it up a   
   >> cooling tower. SMRs built near cities, could heat them. Or acres of   
   >> polytunnels growing plants unable to survive in the local climate.   
   >>   
   >> De-salination plants for fresh water.   
   >>   
   >> Thermodynamics tells us that in a thermal plant, 100% effeciency is   
   >> not available, and its a balance between efficiency and cost. No one   
   >> is comfortable mixing extremely hot high pressure steam and nuclear   
   >> reactors, so they run at safer temperatures and pressures.   
   >   
   >   
   >    An insane amount of energy goes into just HEATING WATER   
   >    for whatever uses.   
   >   
   >    If yer nuke plant has pre-heated the water, as you said,   
   >    there are many uses for it, recover an extra percentage of   
   >    the heat.   
   >   
   Yes. The phrase is 'low grade heat' - so near to ambient that very   
   little mechanical energy can be extracted, but sill enough to heat   
   [green]  houses.   
      
      
   >    They keep trying to get more electricity from 'lower'   
   >    quality heat sources ... but from what I can tell it   
   >    may not be worth it except maybe in a space station   
   >    or similar. Easier to just use "warm" for what it is.   
   >   
   Basically yes. Uranium is cheap. The power statins are expensive.  Just   
   use more uranium   
      
   >    Anyway, thermodynamics is The Law and no kind of power   
   >    plant is gonna be close to 100% efficiency.   
      
   Thermal plant, anyway.   
   --   
   “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit   
   atrocities.”   
      
   ― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de   
   Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de   
   M. de Voltaire   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)