4 ms·
The non-nuclear bit is the key there. Site construction is not the challenge. Turning a theoretical reactor design into a working reactor design is. As far as
by GolfPopper 7mo ago
The non-nuclear bit is the key there. Site construction is not the challenge. Turning a theoretical reactor design into a working reactor design is.
As far as I can tell, in its 20 years of existence, TerraPower has not built a reactor. nor had one of its designs built by someone else.
- mpweiher 7mo agoThis is the first one. Before you build the first one, you haven't built one. Are you saying first things can never be built?
- GolfPopper 7mo agoIf I go around bragging about my awesome self-built home design for years, and then buy, clear and level a plot of land, while it is a necessary step, it is also largely irrelevant to my ability to actually build the house, much less the quality of the finished building.
- mpweiher 7mo agoIf they had bragged that they had built their design and that is proven in practice, you might have a point. But they haven't. So you don't. They started building, with the non-nuclear bits first, as one does. Now they have regulatory approval. One step after another.
- GolfPopper 7mo agoBuilding the actual reactor is the challenging bit. You claimed that building the non-nuclear parts of the construction as evidence that the reactor itself will successfully be built, which is nonsense. That someone builds a launchpad tells you nothing about their ability to build and successfully launch rockets
- mpweiher 7mo agoNo I didn't. I gave the fact that it is being built as evidence counter the claim that it wouldn't be built at all. Which should be uncontroversial.