4 ms·

Sounds like moving to PV for electricity generation is a risky option, since maybe margins won't be so high if they're made here in the US and the economics jus

Sounds like moving to PV for electricity generation is a risky option, since maybe margins won't be so high if they're made here in the US and the economics just don't work for manufacturing from scratch. Perhaps we should consider other options, like the magic rocks we can find in the woods that get really hot when you hold them close together. This way, we can simplify our supply chains and have a reliable supply of energy that doesn't rely on a hostile geopolitical rival, and doesn't require the costly transition of the grid that we'd need to do if we went all in on PV.

Tadpole9181 7mo ago
> the magic rocks we can find in the woods The hypocracy of calling them unserious moments ago.
- remarkEon 7mo ago
  This is a euphemism meant to convey how fortunate we are that civilization has advanced to the point where splitting the atom can but used to generate electricity. I'm sorry that it went over your head.
  - rsync 7mo ago
    I encourage you - and anyone - to read the excellent book: _The Making of the Atomic Bomb_ [1] ... and, in this case, to pay special attention to the multiple chapters describing in painful detail just what is involved in refining and extracting Uranium. As in, cubic acres of land mechanically and chemically processed to extract ounces of material ... which is then sent to enormous production facilities, at tremendous cost, only to begin the refinement process. It is an incredibly long, dirty and energy intensive journey and I am not sure if the ledger of carbon expenses properly accounts for these steps. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Making_of_the_Atomic_Bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Making_of_the_Atomic_Bomb
    - scarecrowbob 7mo ago
      I have spent a lot of time in areas that have been impacted by uranium extraction, including wandering around the four corners area and discovering old uranium mines. Combined with seeing how the extractive energy industry has treated old wells, where they do everything in their power to abandon them and put the burden of cleanup and mainteance of that remediation onto the public, I simply have no faith that nuclear power is "safe" as long as it's private industry doing the work.
triceratops 7mo ago
We should deliberately use a more expensive solution (nuclear) so that some people can make more money and that's somehow more "secure". You also haven't explained how electrification via nuclear won't need a "costly transition of the grid". I'm not hearing much logic in anything you've said so far. I'm convinced you're ideologically opposed to PV and are debating in bad faith here.

Tadpole9181 7mo ago

> the magic rocks we can find in the woods The hypocracy of calling them unserious moments ago.

remarkEon 7mo ago
This is a euphemism meant to convey how fortunate we are that civilization has advanced to the point where splitting the atom can but used to generate electricity. I'm sorry that it went over your head.
- rsync 7mo ago
  I encourage you - and anyone - to read the excellent book: _The Making of the Atomic Bomb_ [1] ... and, in this case, to pay special attention to the multiple chapters describing in painful detail just what is involved in refining and extracting Uranium. As in, cubic acres of land mechanically and chemically processed to extract ounces of material ... which is then sent to enormous production facilities, at tremendous cost, only to begin the refinement process. It is an incredibly long, dirty and energy intensive journey and I am not sure if the ledger of carbon expenses properly accounts for these steps. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Making_of_the_Atomic_Bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Making_of_the_Atomic_Bomb
  - scarecrowbob 7mo ago
    I have spent a lot of time in areas that have been impacted by uranium extraction, including wandering around the four corners area and discovering old uranium mines. Combined with seeing how the extractive energy industry has treated old wells, where they do everything in their power to abandon them and put the burden of cleanup and mainteance of that remediation onto the public, I simply have no faith that nuclear power is "safe" as long as it's private industry doing the work.

triceratops 7mo ago

We should deliberately use a more expensive solution (nuclear) so that some people can make more money and that's somehow more "secure". You also haven't explained how electrification via nuclear won't need a "costly transition of the grid". I'm not hearing much logic in anything you've said so far. I'm convinced you're ideologically opposed to PV and are debating in bad faith here.