From my tests it seems that holding shift is the only to get the liquid into the machine...
Right... you have to hold shift to avoid opening the machine's UI... my suggestion is that it should *also* prevent dumping the liquid on the ground if the machine is full.
The iridium drill already does silk touch. It is silly to make the diamond drill have it too.
Ohh, I thought it did fortune III? Now if only I could find some bloody iridium! 
The only other mod I run is a map mod. Maybe I've just been really unlucky -- I've found several chests with copper and tin ( I think ), even one with a bunch of canned food, just no iridium yet.
Why can't mods add things to nether fortresses? That kind of sucks... I assumed they would be more likely to spawn it.
I sometimes accidentally try to overfill my canning machine by shift right clicking on it with fluid cells, which results in the fluid being placed in the world in front of the machine, washing things away and generally being rather annoying. It would be nice if cells would not dump their contents into the world when you shift right click.
Add a mode to the diamond mining drill to enable silk touch. Costs 5x the eu, and takes 2x as long to mine, but you get the blocks that normally don't drop themselves.
The only thing I have not yet managed to do is build a quantum suit and iridium drill, and this is only because I can't find any iridium. I have looted dozens of chests between several dungeons and two sprawling nether fortresses, and even stumbled onto one of the overworld fortress things with the end portal while looking for more dungeons. Just how low is the probability of this stuff spawning in a chest? I'm kind of getting tired of running all over the world blasting holes in the ground with my mining laser on long range and diving in for a quick peek with the jetpack just to search for more dungeons. At this point I don't have any use for the iridium drill anyhow.
What on earth is electrum dust? The one problem I have with glass fiber is the silver.. it doesn't spawn naturally so it can be hard to get any usable amount as the byproduct of centrifuging gold.
I've been testing this new e-net code and noticed some bugs. I set up a radioisotope thermoelectric generator and a 100 block run of copper to an mfsu. It should output 32 eu/t, but the eu-reader reports slightly less than that. At the end of the 100 block cable run it has a loss of ~1%. The really odd thing though, is that its voltage is reported to be ~254V instead of 32V. I saw roughly the same voltage and loss after inserting a batbox, which always outputs 32 eu/t ( minus the mysterious fractional loss ), and after adding a step-up transformer after that. I say roughly because oddly, the voltage went DOWN by a fraction of a volt after adding the transformer. The step up transformer should be raising the voltage and reducing the loss, thus increasing the total energy received at the other end, but instead, it has the effect of slightly reducing the energy received.
Also the UI on the transformer shows Output: 32.56xxxx... Input: 32.26xxxx... I truncated the numbers because they show like 14 digits of precision, which is a bit silly.
Now here is where it gets really fscked up... on a whim, I turned the transformer around and set it to step-down mode. The output actually *increased* to 256.421V and 31.7994 eu/t according to the reader, and its ui now shows Output: 32.11 Input: 31.80. Note that in both cases, the transformer magically output more energy than it had as input, and in the step-up case, its input was higher than the output of the batbox.
I'm making upgrades, distilling the water to use in the machine to make distilled water defeats the purpose.
The steam generator isn't a machine to make distilled water. It is a machine to make steam to power a turbine to generate energy from nuclear reactors.
Based on the captions, it looks like the first one is for heating up 60k coolant cells to put in the second reactor (which has no uranium cells) to get heat output, which is then put into coolant and passed to steam turbines. I'm not sure how the first reactor got to 79% heat though, the 60k coolant cells should be absorbing the heat from the quad uranium cells, not leaving any heat to get to the reactor.
Edit: looked closer at the pictures, and I think that's mox fuel in the first reactor (rather than uranium), so presumably it was preheated to get more output from it, but iirc mox fuel has higher EU/t output in an EU-style reactor based on the reactor heat, but the heat output by mox fuel is unaffected by the reactor heat, regardless of which reactor type you make. I was going to suggest EU-style for the first reactor, but then I remembered that components heated in one type of reactor can't be cooled in the other type.
Nope, in a fluid reactor mox fuel generates more HEAT at high temperature since it can't generate more eu. This typically leads to thermal runaway / meltdown.
If we could heat coolant using regular heat sources (with 90-95% efficiency) it would be better.
Bingo!
I would cut even *these* values in half.
Definitely not. The new windmills are quite a bit more expensive than the old ones, and you have to keep replacing the rotor. A steel rotor takes 45 iron, most of which has to slowly burn in the blast furnace. I think that expense justifies at least as much output as a semifluid generator, just not nuclear power levels.
I would suggest that the tiers have a bit more overlap:
Wood: 1-10
Iron: 2-20
Steel: 4-30
Carbon: 8-40
So I finally got around to playing with the new windmills. I drove a hv wire up into the air to a height of 170 or so and placed a windmill on top. Initially I figured that I would run a few of them with a CESU to concentrate their power and send it down the line after stepping it up to HV. I was surprised to see the thing typically output between 150 and 180 eu/t, and sometimes up to 200, which should blow up a CESU and melt copper wires. This much power, which normally is reserved for good nuclear setups, is way, way too much for a simple wind generator. Hell, that is more power than you get out of a super heated steam turbine in a 5x5 reactor setup. Wind really should never be capable of more than 64 eu, with 25-45 being more typical.
Well then when reactor is starting or shutting down then i'll get those werid things.. i had output as water - i did not noticed on your video those ghost explosions when steam generator was not yet fully heated. Here it generates water on output.. even on 221 bar valve.
I play multiplayer survival server - and it has no noticealble lag.. mc 1.7.10 , Ic2 v.2.2.648 , buildcraft 6.0.18 , IC2nc2.0.5a, railcraft 9.3.3 + some other non conflicting mods.
Yes, it sucks, but that is how the steam generator currently works; any time it does not have enough heat to make steam, it just spits out water instead.
As it is right now the most efficient way of producing power with nuclear is probably making a lot of low effiency 1 chamber reactors with regular eu and then start making mox as soon as you can using the old mox designs. It is cheaper, produces a lot more power and isn't very complex. as you get more plutonium you make the mox reactor larger and larger starting with the small mox design untill you can build the really big ones. Resource wise that should be the most efficient as long as you have enough lead. If you are short on lead i would probably go with large innefficient reactors.
Next server im skipping 5x5 and i'le build several small nuclear reactors and go towards eu mox reactors as soon as possible. This design comes to mind
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…mhokuftdzickl5rndv6338irk
Very cheap to make and with a respectable amount of power produced for its complexity and size.
I usually have plenty of uranium so it's rarely a problem playing singleplayer. I can imagine it being different on a server thought.
That is more or less what I have done in my survival world. I built 3 6 chamber eu reactors and burned 8 single enriched uranium rods in each of them. It took quite a while to build up enough plutonium to make 7 mox rods, but then I started running a quad mox with 3 singles next to it producing 500 eu/t. Before too long though, you run out of U-238 since each mox rid uses 6 of them and you get 0 back when you recycle them. You can, of course, use all that eu to matter synthesize more uranium ore.
After doing this for the last few weeks, I must say it feels like mox uses up too much u-238 and returns too little plutonium... 6 u-238 -> 1 tiny pile of plutonium just feels off. Either it should give back 3 or 4 of the u-238 or a full pile of plutonium instead of a tiny one.
IRL transformers do have loss, so the fact you lose a bit of EU using them makes sense. I don't think it's anything to do with the voltage, simply they take some EU.
What I was getting at was that with a transformer in the middle, half of the run is at the lower voltage, which has higher loss than the higher voltage half.
The transformer/strorage block resetting the cable length was a bug of the old system they are attempting to remove. You get more loss with the transformer because lower voltage => more loss, which is why you want to use higher voltages up to the max the cable can handle.
Who needs burning material when you have an electric furnace?
The resource count for lead there is obviously way off; it does not take anywhere near that much lead or you'd be mining for a VERY long time ( lead is about as rare as uranium ). Looking at the spreadsheet, it looks like you compute the number of containment vessels needed, then divide that by 4 in cell C10, since each batch you make gives 4 vessels, but then when you compute the amount of lead and stone required, you multiplied by the original count of vessels in B9 rather than the number of batches in C10.
Regular heat vents and reactor heat vents are kind of crappy; I stick to the overclocked + advanced heat exchanger combo. Not sure if the component heat exchangers might be better in some situations... normally the advanced provide enough side transfer plus the core transfer is nice. I guess if you need more side transfer you could use the component heat exchangers but would need to rely more on reactor heat exchangers to dump the extra heat back to the core.
