3 ms·
"Modern tech" is still vastly inferior to nuclear power. Think of it as humanity scoring a roll of the dice to discover 22nd century technology in the 20th.
by neonsunset 4y ago
"Modern tech" is still vastly inferior to nuclear power. Think of it as humanity scoring a roll of the dice to discover 22nd century technology in the 20th.
- missedthecue 4y agoDepends what you mean by "inferior". A horse-drawn carriage has less carbon emissions than an automobile, doesn't it? However, that's not the sole criteria.
- neonsunset 4y agoIt seems the "horse-drawn carriage" argument is being repeated across multitude of comments posted by your account. What makes this comparison with nuclear energy even remotely viable?
- missedthecue 4y agoMuch like carriages, more modern alternatives have rendered it obsolete despite the loud voices that continually refuse to accept its eventual extinction.
- neonsunset 4y agoThe only superior potential more modern source of energy we're aware of that can match energy density, resource efficiency and carbon-free characteristics of nuclear fission is nuclear fusion. Other alternatives lose on one or more parameters, especially when it comes to environmental costs.
- missedthecue 4y agoMaximum possible energy density and resource efficiency are not really considered when designing grids.
- deepsun 4y ago> horse-drawn carriage has less carbon emissions than an automobile Is it? Especially if counting by miles of travel, I'm not sure about it. Also, if by "carbon emissions" I believe we mean "greenhouse gas emissions" -- including methane yes.
- missedthecue 4y agoHorses eat grasses which are part of the carbon cycle.