4 ms·
Ultra Safe Nuclear Reactor
- wcalligan 5y agoI'm curious what you all think about this. Is nuclear power something we can come to rely on? Or is the radioactive waste too risky for widespread use?
- java-man 5y agoHow and where will the spent fuel disposed of after 20 years?
- wcalligan 5y agoGreat question! It doesn't look like they have an answer for that.
- LatteLazy 5y agoLooks like vapour ware to me: * "TM" plastered everywhere which is basically meaningless. * lots of claims but no explanation of how things work (how do you start it with zero outside power?). * Some of the claims immediately fail (its proliferation proof because the fuel is supplied in one module and users don't open that, except I bet a regime could open the reactor with a blow torch and a some brave manual labourers...) * nice visuals and website adds to this: someone wrote a whole section on waste heat but no one explains how it turns heat into electricity without a water supply (so no steam turbines?) * 100 employees but 9 offices, so they're very very international for such a small company. * they speak in the present/past tense (it is clean, we developed it) but their only project is a proof of concept and they haven't started site clearing yet. That doesn't stop them having a video of a completely different site proportedly showing a completed reactor!? Is the video fake or did they forget to list the only completed prototype?
- wcalligan 5y agoThese are great things to consider that didn't even cross my mind. Thank you, I'll be sure to look for flags like those in the future.
- LatteLazy 5y agoNo worries. I am not a fan of nuclear so it may not be my place but... I think one of the big issues with the field is that there are 1001 places like this. Snazzy websites, huge promises, "proven guaranteed tech" and then it turns out they haven't even build a prototype. It gives the whole field a bad name and that's not fair.