|
|
|
|
|
|
by throwaway894345
1693 days ago
|
|
|
> It... didn't work out It did work out. The only reason we don’t have more of it is because of anti-nuclear FUD campaigns. > It's just not there. It's fine. It's safe enough. But it's outrageously expensive relative to other equally advantageous sources, It’s disingenuous to compare unreliable energy sources with reliable energy sources and claim the two are equally advantageous. We can make renewable energy reliable at significant cost, so we must compare that cost with nuclear. Moreover, the price projections for SMRs handily beat out fossil fuels and reliability-adjusted figures for renewables. > and all the magic technologies needed to "fix" that are always a decade away. This is rich considering (1) we know what the “fix” is and it’s not magic (mass produce nuclear reactors i.e., SMRs) and (2) the plan for reliable, economic renewable energy is “pray for an unknown miracle breakthrough in storage” as though that will be discovered and scaled in less than a decade… |
|
|