Posts by Martititi

    I agree. Since plasma is quite hot, it would for example melt the chamber, but it would not make a meltdown, since there wouldn't be enough energy/pressure.... for the plasma to continue the reaction create a bomb.

    Sorry for double posting, I posted 3 days ago so I don't consider it as a true double post.


    I read a thread and it seems like tritium and deuterium in IC2 are not meant to fuel fusion reactor, but more to fuel plasma cannons. So if you can do it as you planned before...? please...

    On the ITER page, they say that there are so much parameters needed to actually reach fusion that it is impossible to have a meltdown. I remind you that unlike fission, fusion cannot form chain reactions, so it cannot meltdown, since you can still have a control over all the conditions.
    For example, you would simply have to lower the pressure a bit, and no more fusion *snap*.
    =)
    So I don't think there could be a fusion meltdown (of course, if you built your fusion reactor to make a nuke, then it is possible).

    First things first: hello.
    Then, I would like to say that I must stick to 1.6.4, and that I cannot experiment myself, so please notice I'm sorry, I'm obliged to ask here.
    Other thing: I did not know where it had to be posted, I thought the most appropriate spot was here.


    Now: the questions:
    Everyone has heard about the new IC2 mechanics, right?
    -Then, could someone explain me how the water mills work now? Is it a mill that consumes water (like, sucking up a block from above and releasing it underneath) or a sort of big wheel that would be moved by a water flow?
    -Does the water mill directly produce EUs? Any other new form of energy?
    -Can any fluid work with a water mill (and produce more/less energy depending on its viscosity)?


    Thanks in advance for answering these questions.


    If I have some others, I'll post them here, or create a new thread in any other appropriate section.

    Well, knowing that some people are part of the bourgeoisie, and also want to show it, they can build structures out of iridium. Or it would be a super duper reinforced block that can hold a nuke. (No, I'm going too far here).

    Yes, but if humans declared that water was not acid, it is mostly because CO2 doesn't dissolve very well in water, if I'm not mistaken.
    I agree with the fact that sulfur (which comes mostly from the combustion of coal) has a greater impact. It is also true that it can be produced by volcanic eruptions though.

    By the way, in order to make the boiler become a multi-block device, wouldn't it be easier to have components such as pipes, which you'll make a hot fluid flow though and that you will immerse in the water you want to heat up? According to how much pipes you immersed and how much water you have to heat up, you can determine how much heat you'll need and how much time it will take.

    First things first! How the hell does Steve manage to put 10 cubic meters of water into a cubic meter of boiler?
    Magic? Nano machines? Alien super advanced 4d space management?


    I would propose another way: first, you can only put 750 L in the cube, and it would be heated up by this means:

    Now, it is possible to have more surface to exchange heat, since there are more tubes passing through the water.
    This concept is based on the steam engines. Replace the hot water (or whatever) in the vertical red tubes by a hot mix of smoke, air and steam and you get the boiler of most steam locomotives.