3 ms·
1. Yes. 2. No, because we already have fission reactors. How many miracles do we need?
by LaMarseillaise 7y ago
1. Yes.
2. No, because we already have fission reactors. How many miracles do we need?
- pier25 7y ago> How many miracles do we need? Right, but humanity won't scale up fission to power everything.
- LaMarseillaise 7y agoWhy not?
- pier25 7y agoI don't know why, but AFAIK there are no countries investing heavily in fission to make that happen.
- LaMarseillaise 7y agoThank you for your honest reply. I have heard of efforts in India and China to develop and build out nuclear fission plants, though I do not know the scale of these plans. However, even ITER (the largest fusion project right now) has a budget of only $10-20 billion. I have high hopes for ITER, but even that has been protested by anti-nuclear organizations such as Greenpeace. I worry that fusion, despite its many advantages, may be stalled or stopped in the same way fission has been. If we cannot solve this issue with a currently-available zero-emission power source, I just cannot see how a new one based on the same principles can succeed.
- DennisP 7y agoIt's hard to imagine anyone successfully protesting a power source which is non-polluting, very close to non-radioactive, dispatchable, and likely cheaper than any other system with those properties. However, if the U.S. does turn out to be that silly, we'll likely get over it when we find ourselves being outcompeted by China, which will certainly have no qualms.
- stjohnswarts 7y agoI'm still hoping China will take up the torch since current administration in the USA seems hellbent on going downhill and regressing technology rather than making progress in this arena.
- phaemon 7y agoBecause fission is insanely expensive. The nuclear fanboys like to try and divert the conversation to safety as they think they can argue that point, but the fact is that nuclear is overpriced garbage.