3 ms·

Which is why we need nuclear power.

• mirimir 9y ago
  Perhaps so. With inherently safe designs, though. Not some simplistic scale-up of Rickover's submarine engine.
  • coldtea 9y ago
    >With inherently safe designs, though. Funny how with reactors always the new designs are "safer" or "100% safe". Until time passes, and those are the "old unsafe designs". It's like there's an industry selling and promoting them each time (no, wait...)
• 21 9y ago
  After Fukushima nuclear fission power is dead and burred.
  • Baeocystin 9y ago
    Not in China. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/china-set-to-overtake-us-as-biggest-nuclear-energy-nation-iea-says-2018-02-21 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/china-set-to-overtake-us-a...
• epistasis 9y ago
  Presumably you're suggesting nuclear because it's carbon free. But if that's the goal, both wind and solar are cheaper now. So nuclear would be a misallocation of resource, reducing the ability to spend on other efforts. And if that carbon-free electricity is going to charge the batteries of machinery to do this, wind and solar will be just as good at that.