I just realized that nuclear powered aircraft are the solution to global warming...

would probably work for military applications as a drone
it could fly around for months carrying nukes
not that there's any need for that these days

Nuclear energy can be the FINAL solution to global warming and a bunch of other problems, if you catch my drift.

>nuke America, India and China
That's a bit harsh.

I say nuke everyone, so there's no one left to worry about global warming.

dumb cunt

In a future world of carbon watching, air travel might become unfeasible for anyone less than the ultra-wealthy unless there are some radical re-designs. For a start the era of the superliner is going to be over and smaller shorter range aircraft will start appearing and a shift back to turboprop. Maybe we'll have hybrids between conventional Aircraft and lighter than Air designs.

Unless suddenly figure out i dunno, graphine or aerogel-like batteries or something.

Russia is based with nuclear tech

>Russia Conducts a New Test of its Nuclear-Powered Cruise Missile
>can technically fly around the world
>just a bit slow

planes are getting more and more efficient every gen and for how many people they carry they will be fine in terms of carbon

>graphine or aerogel-like batteries
Electric planes have the issue that the batteries are the same weight even after 12hours of flying

Except that one time.

Attached: I want my dollar.png (742x411, 48K)

Early electric planes will probably be limited to inter-country/continent flight. Heck they might not even make it between say... NY and LA and need a stop-off half way for a recharge.

>tfw living underground in a random island in pacific
>tfw be last man standing

Attached: Jackass flats.png (530x482, 115K)

Nah plane travel can already be super cheep. And making small planes increase the cost of travel not decrease it.

To be honest, in this scenario global warming will be the least of your worries

GENIUS. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Attached: comrade.gif (420x420, 188K)

>radiation floats up in atmosphere (physics)
>radiation attacks c02
>radiation repairs holes in ozone layer but not before escaping through the hole

It's flawless

>titanium coating prevents radioactivity leak
how about no
>in case of catastrophic failure, crashing into the ground at 600mph
sorry, i meant: noooooooooo

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion#Aircraft_Reactor_Experiment

It eventually turned into molten salt reactors /sci/ loves:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor

>but not before escaping through the hole
kek

you can produce aircraft grade biofuel, capturing CO2 from the environment and turning it into hydrocarbon chains that you burn back into CO2, giving you neutral carbon budget
no need to redesign your planes and entire logistics chain

that's not a bad thing
planes have a lot of systems in place just to balance their fuel in flight
consistent weight just makes the design easier
that is if batteries can ever reach near fossils on energy density

>planes have a lot of systems in place just to balance their fuel in flight

you mean a few pumps and baffles

As the flight goes on though the plane has burned tens of thousands of pounds of fuel. Those batteries don't change and then reduce max take off weight, cargo etc. Even just delivering the plane costs more now

based /RBMK/ crossposter
it would be much more efficient to use nuclear energy to make hydrogen out of water, turn the hydrogen into something less inflammable like ammonia, and use that for clean fuel. look up 'hydrogen economy'.

Attached: Hydrogen.economy.sys_integration_circle.jpg (407x406, 68K)

And use nuclear reactors to make the fuel right?. Genius

far better than miniaturizing a reactor and making it super light and give it wings, yeah
I read a paper by the us air force some years ago touching on the subject of using the reactors on board ships to power compact algae farms and distilling jet fuel in the middle of the ocean
It was feasible but not convenient, seeing how they already had all the logistic in place for conventional fuel and oil prices were not outrageous
But build a plant in the ideal location, pump high volumes out, and let oil prices go up and you have yourself some profit

Planes aren't shielded that much because the need to be light weight.

Great idea user iv always wanted to get crushed by a flying frankenstein-ed Chernobyl Hindenburg plane

>Nuclear solves all our power problems all we need after that is better batteries
>BUT THAT ONE TIME NUCLEAR BAD
God fucking dammit.

You could literally cause 9/11 times 100 with a thing like that

We'd have to eradicate Islam first, I'm not getting into a portable nuke with jihadis around

I'm all for nuclear, but come on now.

No. Just no.

>core ruptures
>half the city covered with toxic material
>water supply probably contaminated
the UK had to throw away tons of food and milk and water decades ago when one of their dumbest reactor designs started spewing fissile material everywhere, and that was in the middle of the fields, not an urban center
It's one of the biggest nuclear incidents and most people don't know its name

Attached: Fission airplane long occupancy.png (587x3008, 28K)

Nuclear powered aircraft is fucking terrifying, and I'm a big advocate of nuclear power in general.

It's simple, just don't build dumb reactors. And for the existing reactors with dumb designs that ARE STILL RUNNING BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BE SHUT DOWN BECAUSE NEW ONES CAN'T BE BUILT DUE TO ENVIRONMENTALISTS just build new ones

this

you do realize that 1/3 of planes lifetime is flying and the rest is maintenance

>Hey this finite resource that as far as we know is going to last us 60years at the rate we are using it
>Let's make places that use it for fuel#
I see nothing wrong with this.

Been tried before. Concept worked but the neutron shielding is too heavy for flight

Tell me more about this amazing design that is light enough to be put in a plane without compromising it's take off weight, and is also sturdy enough to withstand a crash.
They should make airplanes out of that stuff

Like a mini flying Chernobyl

This enrages the software "engineer".

Attached: Screenshot.png (490x268, 127K)

or don't fly as much and use high speed trains instead?

The solution to global warming is to ban planes for 99.999% of all current use cases and force shithead asshole consumerist "world travelers," to take a boat under sail.
>bu bu but muh nuclear and solar hurr
Fuck you fallout and fuck your petrochemical panels.

High speed trains are awesome, but the costs to maintain and build the infrastructure is too high compared to planes

Do you post this every three years?

Lear chemistry, nigger

for moving cargo yes, ships are more efficient, but for moving passengers, planes emit less carbon per passenger-mile. Basically people aren't big and heavy enough to compensate for all the carbon you have to emit to move the ship.

yeah because California has been doing so well with that

>yeah because California has been doing so well with that
>not even built yet
what about Japan and Europe that actually have them in operation for decades with excellent track records?

They were able to do that because so much of the landscape had been wiped clean by the second world war. China was able to do it more recently because they don't have anything even vaguely resembling property rights, they can just say "this is where the railway is going, move or we shoot you"

Also note that Europe and Japan are in the zone where cities are far enough away that its inconvenient to drive, but not so far away that flying is clearly superior. That doesn't describe most of the US, pretty much only the NYC-DC corridor has that kind of density. (not coincidentally that's the only line that Amtrak makes money on)

Um, Captain.
Its carbon coating that makes things invisible, okay you baka? Okay.

But all these 18 year old college babies need to go and find themselves on the other side of the planet, who cares if they pollute the atmosphere while doing so!

Pic

Attached: d0d2050d1da308fa32943bf905852c74a422c7b7_hq.jpg (900x675, 60K)

yeah lets give everyone and their dog radioactive materials

Or everyone can get around in nuclear powered cruise ships.

why not just invent a matter breakdown machine then a matter assembling machine in different areas of the world

>landscape wiped out because of the war

Sure buddy, WWII weaponry flattened a 500km long corridor.
Bruh moment of the day.

more like it got a bunch of people out of the way, and made those who were left desperate for development and rebuilding and jobs. Also there was a distinct lack of environmentalism.

You only need to nuke America to end global warming.

also would solve over population, because a lot more people will die to cancer.
this

first post retard post
nuclear is the best source of energy by far

>titanium coated so it wouldn't leak
True.

Most of "China's emissions" are only to produce cheap junk for American consumerwhores.

(oops, didn't mean to quote that)

They didn't even know about environmentalism.
>inb4 "In the future, leave a plate of black coffee out for me. Also in the past."

If trains travelled at 500km/h across Europe no one would take a plane unless they were going to other continents

Planes suck because you have to drive like an hour to the airport and then arrive at least an hour early and then when you arrive you need 30m to pick up your bags and another hour to get back into the city you arrived

There's so much overhead virtually any speedy train is superior

The main problem with trains in Europe is they aren't well integrated.
It is much simpler to book a plane ticket than to plan a complex train journey across various European countries.

This is something the EU should be focusing on instead of getting more immigrants in.

That's...91,100!

The problem is most train companies are state owned or state controlled so they're stuck in the past century with god awful management and wastefulnes.

>tfw live next to a private airport which does not have public routes anywhere, so if you want to fly you have to drive or take two trains for 200 kilometers in the wrong fucking direction. If that wasn't bad enough, there are no direct plane routes to where I need to go, ao I have to then fly passed the place I am going to TWICE through connecting airports, before landing and have to take a taxi for 50 kilometers. :(

Yes we should totally trust greedy airlines and aircraft manufacturers with nuclear reactors
>yfw reactor SCRAM was an optional feature that wasn't in the airline's budget

Attached: Truckee-Nuclear-Explosion-e1409508386895[1].jpg (882x1035, 141K)

>yeah because California has been doing so well with that
are you saying americans are so retarded they can't even catch up with china?

this

Calling Californians retarded is an insult to retards

fpbp

Global Warming is a Chinese hoax d signed to render American manufacturing non-competitive.

Attached: 1559623288951.png (876x591, 273K)

flying is scary enough as it is, I don't need to worry about radioactive poisoning in addition to the rest

Tr3b already are nuclear.

except he didn't say that, you retarded monkey. He meant converting cars to electricity, which could be supplied by nuclear power station. Why are you even posting if you can't read?

> global warming

Attached: d29.jpg (326x294, 18K)

>project pluto

>You only need to nuke America to end global warming.

you mean the only country that is actually doing anything to cut down on emissions? If the US just disappeared tomorrow what makes you think the bugmen in china would just suddenly stop producing tons of waste?

>what is hydrogen

Attached: 5788750-6353777-image-a-1_1541423428098.jpg (634x448, 94K)

fpbp

nuke the western part of america.... if that will happens..... moving to Alaska... coming soon....

>The energy cost of making hydrogen
Nice try

It's more viable than heavy batteries or a flying nuclear reactor. Nuclear power plants could produce the hydrogen

Trains in some parts of Europe are also very expensive compared with planes. I can go visit my parents on the other side of the country for 35€ by plane, while train tickets cost at least twice as much and take twice the time (counting in the time you spend at the airport waiting to board).