5 ms·
Can't the same be said for local nuclear?
by dexterdog 11y ago
Can't the same be said for local nuclear?
- yAnonymous 11y agoNo.
- aangjie 11y agoErm.. I assumed when he said about capital vs marginal costs of solar it was because the capital is not too high(compared to coal and other power stations/generators). Wouldn't nuclear be the opposite. I can imagine proper waste disposal alone costing more than a solar setup.(I know the solar setup for a small farm-house was very cheap).
- iSnow 11y agoIn the age of global terrorism, local nuclear is a no-go from the start. Dirty bombs hardly make sense in terms of headcount, but their psychological effects would be tremendous. Therefore, security around nuclear installations will remain high - and that's easier to organize and cheaper around big, centralized stations.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ageofwant 11y agoBill Gates disagrees http://terrapower.com/ http://terrapower.com/ Modern LFTR and TWR designs addresses most of your concerns and leaves the rest with less risk than the incumbent status quo. Update your ken on nuclear, the current narrative is hurting as all deeply.
- pjc50 11y agoLocal nuclear is not going to happen in the lifetime of anyone who remembers Chernobyl's fallout across half of western Europe.
- ageofwant 11y agoWhich is a real pity as we traded the flu for cancer when we discarded nuclear in favour of carbon. What will those that will have to live through the fallout of the coal era have to remember ?
- dexterdog 11y agoChernobyl was not local nuclear. It was regional nuclear. People are investing a lot of money in this tech for some very good reasons.
- novalis78 11y agoabsolutely. thorium and thorconpower.com comes to mind. Recent news on supersonic jet comebacks makes me optimistic that eventually someone is going to pickup nuclear and challenges the status quo.