Nuclear, A handful of acres... Now who's
smoking crack... Try at least 2 miles square with buffer zones
and towers and aux facilities... Diablo Canyon, which is a more
recent plant, doesn't need towers due to ocean water cooling, and
it's exclusion area is 2 miles on a side. Now if you want to
talk pie in the sky they are saying the new plants, which there
are none, are going to be 1/2 mile exclusion. But again, you
want to live/work within that space?
Solar isn't any worse than Nuk and a whole lot less support
facilities and no shutting down the land use for the next 50-100
years. Some solar facilities are being raised off the ground by
10 feet to make the areas below usable, which is a benefit to the
land owner.
Around N. Nevada, the electrical companies are throwing up panels
left and right. Getting BLM land isn't that expensive and the
power goes right next door to the server farms.
Redwood Industries, the massive lithium recycling company is
taking the battery packs that are 99% ok and fixing the couple bad
cells and packaging them into lower cost power banks in
containers.
My knock on Solar is that the weather is getting worse and the
damage to the facilities is, in a lot of cases, worked around
instead of being repaired. Easier to just throw up more area than
repair large scale damage for a year because old panels are a pita
to fix...
On 10/27/25 7:47 AM, Bill Prince wrote:
AIs don't smoke.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 10/26/2025 5:34 PM, Steve Jones
wrote:
How much meth was smoked before this post?
You ever see the land lease and neigbor
contacts on these?
Nuclear, a handful of acres
Same solar 4 to 6000 acres
Same wind 100s of square miles
24x7 vs good times
Once we bust the NRC and get gen3 reactors
online, we will start giving salmon their habitat back
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025,
12:29 PM Bill Prince <[email protected]>
wrote:
Petro-dollars are quickly becoming worthless. We've
reached the point where renewables (mainly solar)
are the fastest, cheapest way to get power to the
grid. That will be the main driver going forward.
Just in the first half of this year China has put up
over 200 GW of solar power. That is roughly
equivalent to 200 nuclear reactors. They did that in
six months, and it would have taken decades if it
was nuclear.
A barrel of oil is now around $60, and we are going
into a glut, which will drive the price of oil
downward. If the price gets much below $50, then all
of a sudden all the shale-oil becomes a loser, and
will get shut down.
It will be interesting how this plays out, but I'm
not betting on oil.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 10/25/2025 5:30 PM, Jan-GAMs wrote:
It doesn't work that way. The petrol-dollar
assholes will just get the government to make it
illegal and force us to use gas.
On 10/24/25 19:46, Steve Jones wrote:
George and Gracie did a skit
"If we had some eggs, we could
have ham and eggs, if we had some ham"
IF we actually
got functioning Fusion, the greatest
benefit would be being able to just forget
about all these places... Take away the
petrodollar and they would blow away in
the desert winds...
On 10/24/25 9:28 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Yemen has a
10 year old civil war, partly a
proxy war between Iran and the
Saudis. Yemen was formed by the
merger of North Yemen and South
Yemen, the latter was a former
British colony.
The Houthis
are technically a “movement” but
they control the capital and much of
the territory and have their own
government structure. The
internationally recognized and Saudi
supported government moved to Adan
in the south after the Houthi
revolution or coup. It looks to me
like the split might be roughly the
former North Yemen under control of
the Houthis and the former South
Yemen under control of the
internationally recognized
government. I seem to remember that
the Houthis were threatening to take
control of the whole country when
the Saudis intervened. But the
Saudis were mainly just bombing
stuff.
The Houthis
are Iranian puppets so you could
compare them to Hezbollah, but maybe
more like revolutionaries, they
control a good chunk of Yemen. Not
nice people.
But Yemen
is a mess. I think I read the
British left because of widespread
terrorism and that was decades ago.
If a giant sinkhole swallowed the
whole place, we would probably say
good riddance.
From: AF
<[email protected]>On Behalf Of Bill Prince Sent: Friday, October 24,
2025 10:08 AM To:[email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] now
we're blowing up boats in the
Pacific
Are the Houthis an actual country, or
just another Al-Qaeda kind of group?
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 10/24/2025
7:53 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
So are
the Houthis justified sinking
vessels in the Red Sea from
companies and countries that
support Israel’s war in Gaza?
From: AF
<[email protected]>On Behalf Of Carl
Peterson Sent: Friday, October 24,
2025 9:40 AM To: AnimalFarm Microwave
Users Group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] now
we're blowing up boats in the
Pacific
The Daily had a
really good bit on this
yesterday. Not particularly about
blowing up boats but about the
competing interests in the Trump
administration re Venezuela. It's
a great 30 min listen.
Background:
Maduro lost the last election in
a landslide (30%/70%) but
refused to cede power.
TLDL:
Trump wanted
to cut a deal and was working on
it but Rubio won out and is
focused on regime change.
On Thu, Oct
23, 2025 at 9:33PM Steve Jones
<[email protected]>
wrote:
Heh
On Thu,
Oct 23, 2025, 9:13PM Chuck McCown
<[email protected]> wrote:
Might
be safer to have a
Maple Leaf flag. You
could always run the
stars and bars, at
least they would
presume you would be
armed and would
fight.
From: AF
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Mark
Radabaugh Sent:
Thursday, October
23, 2025 7:41 PM To:
AnimalFarm
Microwave Users
Group <[email protected]> Subject:
Re: [AFMUG] now
we're blowing up
boats in the
Pacific
So
that American flag on
the back is going to
protect me from the
various other countries
that decide to even up
the score?
From: AF
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf
Of Mark
Radabaugh Sent:
Thursday,
October 23,
2025 6:57 AM To:
AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group
<[email protected]> Subject:
Re: [AFMUG]
now we're
blowing up
boats in the
Pacific
Someday I would really like to be able to sail around
the Caribbean
and South
America
without having
to worry about
being randomly
blown out of
the water for
no reason at
all. “Well,
the US said it
was OK to kill
people in
international
waters”.
Mark
On Oct 23, 2025, at 1:31AM, Jason
McKemie <[email protected]>
wrote:
It seems very telling that when they blew up a boat
and people
survived, they
sent them back
to their home
country vs
prosecuting
them. You
can't
introduce that
testimony into
the public
record.
Replying to myself,
which is
perhaps a sign
I should be in
therapy, but I
just realized
one reason why
the Coast
Guard is
underappreciated
or at least
unknown
compared to
Army, Navy,
Air Force and
Marines. They
are part of
DHS not DOD.
But now that DOD is
calling itself
the Department
of War, maybe
DHS is just
fine.
Although one
is Hegseth and
the other is
Noem, so flip
a coin.
Coast Guard is also
much smaller,
has a smaller
budget, and a
much smaller
PR budget. No
money to toot
their own
horn.
From: AF
<[email protected]>
On Behalf
Of Ken
Hohhof Sent:
Wednesday,
October 22,
2025 10:50 PM To:
'AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group'
<[email protected]> Subject:
Re: [AFMUG]
now we're
blowing up
boats in the
Pacific
Yeah, but if it’s on
the ocean, I’d
prefer to see
a Hawaii Five
0 style
chase. With
McGarrett in a
speedboat, and
at the end he
says “book
‘em, Danno”.
Besides, I think the
Coasties are
an
underappreciated
branch of the
US military.
From: AF
<[email protected]>
On Behalf
Of Steve
Jones Sent:
Wednesday,
October 22,
2025 8:31 PM To:
AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group
<[email protected]> Subject:
Re: [AFMUG]
now we're
blowing up
boats in the
Pacific
I prefer to see cartels bombed. When they started
moving the
fent, they
chose bombs. A
little nose
candy here and
there, some
dope, a little
crystal, even
some heroin
was
manageable.
But these
ducks decided
to move shit
that one
mistake kills.
Fuckbag
dealers are
putting it it
club drugs and
on vicodins.
Kids don't
have a chance
to make a
mistake.
Bomb the shit out of them. Sink their boats, cut their
life jackets,
chum the
waters, I
don't care as
long as they
die. They
don't want to
give our kids
a second
chance, their
adults deserve
as terrible a
death as
possible.
Idgaf about
human rights,
they don't,
and I have no
interest in
the high road.
Turns out drug dealers sometimes get shot, who knew?
Maybe they
were
delivering
critical
supplies to
orphanages,
because
speedboats
with three
engines mean
urgent care is
being
delivered
expeditiously?
Generally deployed from
a ramp on the
back of a
larger cutter
along with
helicopters.
These things
vaguely remind
me of the WWII
PT boats.
I would not want to try
and outrun the
Coast Guard.
From: AF
<[email protected]> On
Behalf Of Adam
Moffett Sent: Wednesday,
October 22,
2025 4:24 PM To: 'AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group'
<[email protected]> Subject: Re:
[AFMUG] now
we're blowing
up boats in
the Pacific
Yes, and that's the primary argument against this
practice. If
we have solid
intel that
they're
carrying
drugs, and we
know where
they are, then
as soon as
they enter our
territorial
waters we can
board the boat
and arrest
them. The
Coast Guard
doesn't need a
warrant or
even a
specific
reason to
board a boat.
Some of those
boats are
faster than
Cutters, but I
don't have
solid info on
how often they
actually
escape when
they're
already being
tracked. It's
hard to
imagine they
really get
away often
because the
Coast Guard
also has
helicopters,
and they're
allowed to
continue a
pursuit into
international
waters (and
onto land) as
long as the
pursuit
started in US
waters.
Regardless of how often they really get away, it's not
normal to blow
up someone's
boat as a law
enforcement
action. We
also don't
execute drug
traffickers,
and even when
the state
executes
someone
there's a
trial first.
but.....
post-911 we treat foreign terrorist organizations as
enemy
combatants
the executive branch gets to decide who counts as an
FTO. The sec
of state, sec
of treasury,
and attorney
general all
have to agree,
but they also
all have the
same boss.
Nobody can really stop the executive branch from
declaring an
FTO.
Congress could pass a bill to override someone's
listing as an
FTO, but to
date they've
never done
it.
The courts could overturn an FTO listing, but for a
lot of reasons
it's almost
impossible.
So effectively the President and/or their cabinet has
a completely
legal pathway
to authorize
military force
against just
about anyone,
and there's
very little
anyone can do
about it.
It's not that
I have
sympathy for
drug
smugglers,
it's that all
we can do is
take someone's
word for it
that it was a
drug
smuggler. If
anyone is
totally
comfortable
with that then
I'm curious
what your
rationale is.
From: AF <[email protected]>
on behalf of
Ken Hohhof
<[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday,
October 22,
2025 3:00 PM To: 'AnimalFarm
Microwave
Users Group'
<[email protected]> Subject: [AFMUG]
now we're
blowing up
boats in the
Pacific
I
thought the
Coast Guard
was able to
intercept
boats and
board them,
arrest people
and confiscate
cargo. I seem
to remember
they
specifically
acquired high
speed boats
that were a
match for
anything a
drug runner
might have.
