Survivorrrrz.
I am not worried about the magnetic field flipping, because by the time that happens the giant Mickey Mouse ears that Disney builds will cause the earth to flip like a wingnut in space and realign itself with the new position of the magnetic field.
As the North and South magnetic poles are moving towards the opposite pole (to reverse the field), there will be a point in time at which the magnetic poles are at the Equator.
At some point during that year there will be an orientation in which the end of one pole points directly toward the Sun, and 6 months later at the opposite pole.
At this time there will an Aurora Equacletauris in the night sky for all those folks living and playing in the tropical bands to see, similar to the Aurora Australis on one side or the Aurora Borealis for the other, depending upon the rotational direction of the magnetic field (CW or CCW).
Many tropical bands (including jimmy buffet) will be able to play all night due to the Sun never setting; so don’t worry, be happy.
A big and nagging question for me is how large will be the induced back emf (BEMF), and will it grow larger as the Earth’s magnetic field decays further?
Anyway, the one thing we should do across North America is to upgrade our power infrastructure.
All of those EVs, hydrogen/ammonia/methane generators and heaters aren’t going to power on themselves.
A 750kV AC line upgrade will be doable within the next 5-10 years, and a general megavolt DC upgrade through the entire North American continent is definitely possible.
At most the grid should act as a buffer, not as the primary distribution network. Since power transmission is without exception extremely inefficient it should without exception be generated as locally as possible. All forms of solar put together (SE, wind, hydro) aren’t enough and aren’t universally available year round. Fusion isn’t practical since we can’t duplicate the conditions where it occurs without using more power than we get back. Enriched Uranium reactors were only pursued for their weapons grade byproducts but the common failure point of every major disaster was the necessity of using the water as both coolant and power generation as well as control rods to hopefully shut down the reaction. To contain the steam high pressure pipes are used and the higher the temperature gets the higher the pressure. When(not if) those fail you get 3mi island, Chernobyl, Fukushima. Control rods aren’t a fail safe, they only work to a point beyond which you are well and truly . Thorium molten salt reactors don’t have control rods and aren’t water cooled. There is no critical mass and there are no weapons grade byproducts so it could be made available to every country instead of being watch dogged. With no cooling towers and associated plumbing, plant sizes aren’t restricted to a particular minimum or maximum size so smaller plants could be located where need is low or risk is high(fault zones, it’s so much easier to make a small structure earthquake proof than a large one). Thorium is only fissile when bombarded by neutrons. The fail safe is if it gets too hot a plug melts and the molten salt drains from the core to a separate tank and the reaction simply stops, no hoopla, a true fail-to-safe. It’s not a pressurized system so no explosions or expanding clouds of radioactive vapor. Since water isn’t used as coolant there’s no necessity to put the plant near a large water source where flooding or Tsunami puts the facility at risk. The main usable byproduct is the Plutonium isotope used in the power plants we put on extra terrestrial probes since solar panels rapidly lose output as you move away from the sun and are completely ineffective in permanent shadow. Thorium is one of the more common elements, it’s literally as cheap and abundant as dirt and no one has a monopoly on it.
IFRs, Integrated Fast Reactors, solve most of the “problems” associated with nuclear (or nuculer) power. They use fast neutrons vs slow (thermal) neutrons. Everything’s integrated, so you can’t separate out Pu or other nasties to make weapons-grade stuff. And it’ll eat practically anything as fuel, whether U, Pu, Th, even low-grade crap what’s currently disposed of as waste. What’s left over is so depleted you could bury it in your backyard vs in some salt mines.
Wow, this took a turn – and for the better.
In my simple world, Thorium Molten Salt Reactors were to be the best of the nuclear epoch. Unfortunately, no one seems audacious enough to pioneer the tech albeit in China. And I would doubt they would share their knowledge. They have their drawbacks as producing Thulium 208 which decays with gamma radiation. Problematic for the waste material handling. Then the Thorium has to be first injected with neutrons to start the reaction. Basically, a regular Uranium reactor initiates the fission.
As for IFRs, no moderator hence the design is critical. Also using liquid sodium is pyrophoric if an atmospheric breach. Much worst when transferring to the water cycle that turbine the electrical. But humans are well adjusted to contain such hazards…
Well you 3 guys seem to know nukes, so when you say a smaller system to be earthquake-proof, what sort of output size are you talking?
off topic a bit:
Could a thorium reactor system be sized small enough to provide power to a spacecraft for deep space missions, or to be transported to the moon or mars to provide power on the surface?
back:
Can any nuke reactor power system be designed for fail-safe operation? What are the obstacles to be solved to make this happen?
What negative or hidden consequences might there be in the event of a failure?
From wicked pædia:
IFR development began in 1984 and the U.S. Department of Energy built a prototype, the Experimental Breeder Reactor II. On April 3, 1986, two tests demonstrated the inherent safety of the IFR concept. These tests simulated accidents involving loss of coolant flow. Even with its normal shutdown devices disabled, the reactor shut itself down safely without overheating anywhere in the system. The IFR project was canceled by the US Congress in 1994, three years before completion.
More importantly, it has passive safety. Ie, if shiite goes wrong, it just fizzles out.
Costs & time to disembark from fossil fuels.
Although solar & wind are in full deployment, the energy storage and economics on such a large scale becomes counter-effective. Also, the waste of solar panels is hazardous, wind turbine blades of carbon fibre are non-recyclable; the making of such is energy and chemical-intensive.
Nuclear presents itself as the greener alternative. However, the construction times make for a substantial capital cost with risk – for perceived public distrust and corrupt engineering, the plants are prematurely decommissioned or projects abandoned. In the race to get off oil before the tipping point (if it hasn’t been tripped yet). 10 to 15 years is cutting too close. And add the extended design/development of the newer reactor types – won’t make any deadlines there.
IFRs would be a nice addition to a nation’s herd of conventional reactors; burning the waste and reducing the stockpiling.
Thoiums may be a good candidate for small or micro-generators. But these are are just concepts. Another 20 or so years before any serious builds.
Interesting if micro-sized reactors could be used for space deployment. As it’s all speculative, why not? Hell, we !@#$%^& this planet. We’ll have to find a new home.
Right now the biggest problem to solve is insufficent and inefficient storage capabilities for renewal and waste power sources. Energy production is heading towards the point that you have some stable base line energy, mostly nuclear. Then all the extra energy needed is taken from all the small sources that are available. Wind, solar, waste heat. There just isn’t a way to use those small combined energy sources when needed but only when they are available. Not enough storage capacity. So we still have to use fossil fuels to keep main electric grid stable and houses warm. In Finland there is now somekind of a boom about inventing and building different storage solutions. I’m actually part of some of those.