3 ms·
Nope the waste-disposal problem has conclusively solved: you bury it in a deep unmarked hole [1] I tire of the constant opposition to nuclear energy on HN and
by andbberger 6y ago
Nope the waste-disposal problem has conclusively solved: you bury it in a deep unmarked hole [1]
I tire of the constant opposition to nuclear energy on HN and in general. We discovered rocks spicy enough to power our civilization 50+ years ago, but got outplayed so hard by big oil that to this day people are still opposed to it.
Waste? Nope not a problem
Too expensive (HN's favorite critique), nope, not really.
Unsafe? Patently false
Doesn't work in cold weather? Only because of ERCOT's ineptitude
The current crisis in Texas is a direct result of anthropogenic climate change. Had we gone big into nuclear 50+ years ago this might have never have happened
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repo...
I'm not even really responding to GP anymore I'm just salty. Give me an ENORMOUS breakthrough in energy storage. Or give me fission power plants.
- notacoward 6y ago> Or give me fission power plants. We have those. Did you mean fusion?
- andbberger 6y agoI want more. Modern designs, not the old dangerous (but still extremely safe) kind that is predominant today.
- bcrl 6y agoThey had to turn off a nuke because the water intake was freezing. Everywhere else in the world, you put your water intake deep enough into the body of water that it's not going to freeze. Sounds like engineers in Texas cheaped out on their designs because they thought "oh, that will never happen". We all know what happens when we do that in software...