3 ms·
> It strikes me a lot of the nuclear focus is (understandable, if not justifiable) interest in cool new technology. This is very funny. The first nuclear power
by bscphil 5y ago
> It strikes me a lot of the nuclear focus is (understandable, if not justifiable) interest in cool new technology.
This is very funny. The first nuclear power plant began operation in June 1954. That same year is when Bell Labs created the first commercially viable solar cell (although I doubt it was used to generate power for any grids until long after that).
So this (implied) claim is not just wrong about the age of nuclear power, it even gets the chronology wrong in comparing it to solar.
- nonplus 5y agoI've personally visited the X-10 reactor at Oak Ridge (built in the forties). So in the above, nuclear is not 'technology' until it's producing power for customers? I'm sure the intent of their statement is salt/SMR/other exotic designs that the NRC has not greenlit (and, I think I'm ok NOT greenlighting designs that don't account for 50 - 80 years of maintenance/operation/risk) I don't think technology and invention (or discovery for that matter) are synonymous. There has been progress in nuclear technology, even if it's so far non viable.