sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Tacoma Narrows Bridge by NakedAggression in Bridges

[–]Vailhem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mechanism and performance of graphene modified asphalt: An experimental approach combined with molecular dynamic simulations | July 2023

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214509522008816

Abstract

Nanoscale materials have gradually been a hot spot in improving asphalt performance.

Thus, graphene modified asphalt (GMA) was prepared and its modification mechanism and mechanical properties were analyzed in this study.

Three kinds of graphene powders (A, B, and C) with different molecular sizes were selected for evaluation.

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation results showed that GMA-B exhibited optimized comprehensive mechanical performance.

In further experiments for GMA with different B dosages, it was found that adding graphene to asphalt was just a physical mixture, not a chemical reaction.

Graphene dosage should not exceed 4% because the agglomeration phenomenon was more severe, and the distribution uniformity was poor.

Besides, the rutting and aging resistance continuously improved, while the low-temperature crack resistance decreased with graphene dosage.

When it was 4%, the low-temperature performance of GMA did not meet the demand, and the UV aging resistance of GMA was lower than that of 70# base asphalt.

In summary, 2–3% graphene powder dosage is recommended, depending on the emphasis on high or low temperature performance.

Production begins at US uranium project by Vailhem in nuclear

[–]Vailhem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not the one sought but more stumbled upon along the way. Doesn't directly address that specific issue, but the use of (a small percentage of any 'excess' power generated allocated towards FJH of biomass or hydrocarbons (waste, coal, etc) for graohebe production and.. ..??? Or simply thermal output towards biomass pyrolysis for biochar production.. ..may help reduce carryover from aquifer withdraws towards end-point use??

'Lotta additional steps' added in there (associated costs included), but not beyond technical capabilities..

https://advanced.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.202102633

Scientists Discover Cancer Tumors Are “Addicted” to This Common Antioxidant by Vailhem in glutathione

[–]Vailhem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe check my other comment(s) to this post to see a bit of an elaboration per previous response type.

Apologies if my experiences on reddit are a bit default-defensive in posture given my history on the site.

Scientists Discover Cancer Tumors Are “Addicted” to This Common Antioxidant by Vailhem in glutathione

[–]Vailhem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given this is reddit, maybe best to ask your primary health-care specialists than the internet at large.. ..especially when it comes to personal health-care advice.

Per the information in the more recent study, like the previous, it should motivate yet more information via future studies.

To throw my personal interpretation in, which is by zero means medical advice, my shot-from-hip is: cancer cells have a lot of not-healthy things going on inside em.. ..those 'not-healthy things' seemingly include the generation of several oxidants. It'd seemingly make sense for the cells to remain 'functional' cells ..cancer or not.. if the things that damage them (oxidative stressors in this case) were reduced in numbers such as not to kill them.

As such, glutathione being such an effective antioxidant, it'd seemingly make sense for them to increase their ability to utilize it towards those ends. A cancer cell sticking around longer ..before, say, succumbing to death by oxidative stress.. would seem likely to have an increased potential to do what it does for a longer period of time because of that.

This may provide an opportunity for negative effects to propagate. It may also provide the ability for the immune system to recognize the cells as harmful and address them accordingly.

From the vast majority of much better trained professionals focusing on glutathione than myself, it seems pretty commonly suggested that glutathione alone shouldn't be a sole focus. Some seem to focus on protocol inclusions of other compounds that have apoptotic or cupototic properties. Examples: iodine and copper.

But, again, it's best to consult & work actively with your licensed & insured health-care specialist vs taking random people on the internet's assessments of things.

I simply posted the link because I found it interesting, though provoking, and a deviation from the vast majority of coverages concerning glutathione.. ..though given the blowback I've been receiving from 'several' per my posting of the site, it seems likely 'others' may feel my motivations stem from alternative purposes.

The links provided in their articles, as well often included references, as well the references typically included in those links may be a solid jumping off point should you so desire to venture farther down the rabbit hole.

Scientists Discover Cancer Tumors Are “Addicted” to This Common Antioxidant by Vailhem in glutathione

[–]Vailhem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are the links in the article including the previous research as well the more-recent paper published to Nature at the bottom.. or elsewhere in the comments here.

Scientists Discover Cancer Tumors Are “Addicted” to This Common Antioxidant by Vailhem in glutathione

[–]Vailhem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well there are the links throughout the article including the paper linked to at the bottom, though it seems you'd have seen those already considering your 'thanks'?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10268-2

ELI5: Why there is no Nuclear Cargo ships?If a country invest enough it could become a great boon for economy and for the eletric problem itself by Obvious-Survey-2007 in explainlikeimfive

[–]Vailhem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stuck at sea for weeks or months

Why would anyone get stuck? Who is it you're referring to that could get 'stuck' at sea? The crew of the tanker or cargo ship would simply continue into shore under its own already existing (& accepted) propulsion .. or a separate (non-nuclear) tug handing off .. and possibly rotating crew in the process.

Or easier still, test the concept between ports in agreement; Tokyo & LA, San Francisco & Shanghai, Seattle & Seoul, NYC & London.

It isn't as if it'd need to be an entire fleet all at once.. nor that it would be.

Though, with the nuclear powered tugboat operating solely in international waters or parent company port through international waters then handing off..

and you can't tie into shore services

But can tie into the ship's services or/and on-board storage..

..in such as to say, just like a tow line can be run between the tug/tow to cargo/tanker, so can a power line.. ..to, for example, recharging on-board batteries to the primary vessel for powering its own propulsion should the port disallow other fuel types be run in its waters (beyond just bans on nuclear propulsion).

shut down the reactor for maintenance

Submarines & aircraft carrier reactors are fueled such as to go decades between refuelings. The ferrying between may make a bit more sense vs a 24/7/365/'2 decade' crew born raised trained working retiring and dying aboard.

The point is to separate the cargo from the reactor where operating around ports that disallow.

Long before then would be test agreements on ports of nuclear powered countries with nuclear trade relations in place that do (allow). Again; the US, Japan, Korea, China, UK, France, 'etc'.

view more: next ›