4 ms·

I'd like to see a well reasoned plan to install small modular nuclear power at peoples houses that prevents the mentally ill, criminally reckless or terrorist m

I'd like to see a well reasoned plan to install small modular nuclear power at peoples houses that prevents the mentally ill, criminally reckless or terrorist minded people from cracking them open and obtaining access to the isotopes.

pitched 4mo ago
There isn’t much need to extract isotopes if you have an actual working reactor, is there? Just use that as-is to cause whatever damage.
- walrus01 4mo ago
  From a strictly red team threat analysis perspective, if you have an extremely safe working reactor that can't be made to melt down, no, the reactor can't be used to hurt much that is in the same location as the reactor. If you are able to get the isotopes out and start spreading them around or making a dirty bomb type thing (where the explosion just serves the purpose of throwing the isotopes around), that could be pretty catastrophic.
cobbzilla 4mo ago
have you never visited a rural neighborhood? or an affluent neighborhood? there are still many neighborhoods where people leave their doors unlocked because it is actually that safe. not every location is rife with criminal activity, and many are well protected.
- walrus01 4mo ago
  Serious question, do you actually think that if you distribute millions of small nuclear reactors to homeowners geographically spread out around all of North America, 0.000% of them will be dangerously mentally ill, criminally reckless or inclined to terrorist like activity? Based on the frequency and number of mass shooter type incidents, (or like, David Koresh and the Branch Davidians) this would be a very naive view. It doesn't require a criminally minded 3rd party coming onto someone's "safe" property to do something horrible with a sawzall and/or oxy-acetylene cutting torch.
  - cobbzilla 4mo ago
    have you never heard of tamper-proof containers? mess with it, it’s useless and you go to jail for a long time? Plus, they’re ubiquitous, you don’t know who has one, max damage is minimal even worst case — go fish!
    - walrus01 4mo ago
      That's a very optimistic view of humanity that I can't say I share. If you give a sufficiently motivated person enough isolation and time, they can cut into just about anything. And possibly deal with cleaning up the results of any internal tamperproof countermeasures. In a world that contains people like the Las Vegas mass shooter or those who conducted the 2015 attacks in Paris, handing out isotopes to the ordinary person seems like a recipe for disaster. We live in a world where multiple people are killed every year by tipping vending machines over onto themselves and you propose to make nuclear reactors a mass market consumer good that goes in everyone's garage?
    - cobbzilla 4mo ago
      We have microwave ovens. They’re pretty safe. Imagine something as safe as that. We can do it. But I can’t disagree that it’s more exciting to imagine terror dreams.
      - myrmidon 4mo ago
        First: microwaves are only safe if you don't mess with them, a bunch of people get killed by tinkering with their high-voltage transformers (at least 35 US deaths from one specific usecase alone in the last decade, see https://www.woodturner.org/Woodturner/Resources/Safety-Materials/Safety-Fractal-Burning-Lichtenburg-Burning.aspx https://www.woodturner.org/Woodturner/Resources/Safety-Mater...). A big potential concern with small reactors are highly toxic radionuclides; those can be much more dangerous (with LD50 far under 1mg/kg) than "ordinary toxins" like bleach or even nasty stuff like methyl isocyanate. That means expensive disposal and protection measures. All of this is a non-concern though because there is no realistic path for nuclear reactors to compete with PV+batteries, ever. With cells already <$100/kWh and the panels being cheaper than glass windows, we will never be able to build, maintain and dispose of nuclear based reactors tech at a competitive price point, especially not with the insane current battery demand (automotive) driving technical optimisation and price competition.
- yehoshuapw 4mo ago
  While that is true, if there is something worthwhile enough in a far and safe location - it won't stay that way
  - cobbzilla 4mo ago
    It’s everywhere. It’s in the shed in your backyard. Nobody knows it’s there. Lots of people have them. It’s an appliance. The worst thing an evildoer can do is blow up your own house and the few around it. and no one does that because you go to jail forever. The worst thing you can do is let it melt down, which means it quietly shuts itself down.
    - walrus01 4mo ago
      > The worst thing an evildoer can do is blow up your own house and the few around it. No, they can take the isotopes out and dump it into your local water supply. Or if they're suicidal and the isotopes have been encapsulated in some sort of tamperproof system, grid the whole thing down to granulated powder using less than $20,000 of power tools (disregarding their own health and the entire nearby area, of course) and then dump it into the local water supply.
      - fragmede 4mo ago
        If someone evil has access to the water supply, is radioactive material the worst they could do? that'll, what, give some people cancer which is really bad but it'll take a while to get them. If people wanted to be shitheads, they could already dump arsenic or LSD into the water supply, or any number of others things. that are already available to them right now! Have you personally tested your taps chlorine or flouride or lead levels recently?
        Micrococonut 4mo ago
        Except most people don’t have industrial levels of arsenic, LSD, or other highly toxic substances stockpiled in their homes. Nor do they have a way to obtain it without triggering a visit from a swat team. Which is exactly what this comment chain is discussing. The potential for harm when you don’t have to go anywhere but your own basement/a few neighbors to obtain enough enriched uranium to create a superfund site.

pitched 4mo ago

There isn’t much need to extract isotopes if you have an actual working reactor, is there? Just use that as-is to cause whatever damage.

walrus01 4mo ago
From a strictly red team threat analysis perspective, if you have an extremely safe working reactor that can't be made to melt down, no, the reactor can't be used to hurt much that is in the same location as the reactor. If you are able to get the isotopes out and start spreading them around or making a dirty bomb type thing (where the explosion just serves the purpose of throwing the isotopes around), that could be pretty catastrophic.

cobbzilla 4mo ago

have you never visited a rural neighborhood? or an affluent neighborhood? there are still many neighborhoods where people leave their doors unlocked because it is actually that safe. not every location is rife with criminal activity, and many are well protected.

walrus01 4mo ago
Serious question, do you actually think that if you distribute millions of small nuclear reactors to homeowners geographically spread out around all of North America, 0.000% of them will be dangerously mentally ill, criminally reckless or inclined to terrorist like activity? Based on the frequency and number of mass shooter type incidents, (or like, David Koresh and the Branch Davidians) this would be a very naive view. It doesn't require a criminally minded 3rd party coming onto someone's "safe" property to do something horrible with a sawzall and/or oxy-acetylene cutting torch.
- cobbzilla 4mo ago
  have you never heard of tamper-proof containers? mess with it, it’s useless and you go to jail for a long time? Plus, they’re ubiquitous, you don’t know who has one, max damage is minimal even worst case — go fish!
  - walrus01 4mo ago
    That's a very optimistic view of humanity that I can't say I share. If you give a sufficiently motivated person enough isolation and time, they can cut into just about anything. And possibly deal with cleaning up the results of any internal tamperproof countermeasures. In a world that contains people like the Las Vegas mass shooter or those who conducted the 2015 attacks in Paris, handing out isotopes to the ordinary person seems like a recipe for disaster. We live in a world where multiple people are killed every year by tipping vending machines over onto themselves and you propose to make nuclear reactors a mass market consumer good that goes in everyone's garage?
  - cobbzilla 4mo ago
    We have microwave ovens. They’re pretty safe. Imagine something as safe as that. We can do it. But I can’t disagree that it’s more exciting to imagine terror dreams.
    - myrmidon 4mo ago
      First: microwaves are only safe if you don't mess with them, a bunch of people get killed by tinkering with their high-voltage transformers (at least 35 US deaths from one specific usecase alone in the last decade, see https://www.woodturner.org/Woodturner/Resources/Safety-Materials/Safety-Fractal-Burning-Lichtenburg-Burning.aspx https://www.woodturner.org/Woodturner/Resources/Safety-Mater...). A big potential concern with small reactors are highly toxic radionuclides; those can be much more dangerous (with LD50 far under 1mg/kg) than "ordinary toxins" like bleach or even nasty stuff like methyl isocyanate. That means expensive disposal and protection measures. All of this is a non-concern though because there is no realistic path for nuclear reactors to compete with PV+batteries, ever. With cells already <$100/kWh and the panels being cheaper than glass windows, we will never be able to build, maintain and dispose of nuclear based reactors tech at a competitive price point, especially not with the insane current battery demand (automotive) driving technical optimisation and price competition.
yehoshuapw 4mo ago
While that is true, if there is something worthwhile enough in a far and safe location - it won't stay that way
- cobbzilla 4mo ago
  It’s everywhere. It’s in the shed in your backyard. Nobody knows it’s there. Lots of people have them. It’s an appliance. The worst thing an evildoer can do is blow up your own house and the few around it. and no one does that because you go to jail forever. The worst thing you can do is let it melt down, which means it quietly shuts itself down.
  - walrus01 4mo ago
    > The worst thing an evildoer can do is blow up your own house and the few around it. No, they can take the isotopes out and dump it into your local water supply. Or if they're suicidal and the isotopes have been encapsulated in some sort of tamperproof system, grid the whole thing down to granulated powder using less than $20,000 of power tools (disregarding their own health and the entire nearby area, of course) and then dump it into the local water supply.
    - fragmede 4mo ago
      If someone evil has access to the water supply, is radioactive material the worst they could do? that'll, what, give some people cancer which is really bad but it'll take a while to get them. If people wanted to be shitheads, they could already dump arsenic or LSD into the water supply, or any number of others things. that are already available to them right now! Have you personally tested your taps chlorine or flouride or lead levels recently?
      - Micrococonut 4mo ago
        Except most people don’t have industrial levels of arsenic, LSD, or other highly toxic substances stockpiled in their homes. Nor do they have a way to obtain it without triggering a visit from a swat team. Which is exactly what this comment chain is discussing. The potential for harm when you don’t have to go anywhere but your own basement/a few neighbors to obtain enough enriched uranium to create a superfund site.