This is going well, isn’t it?
Typically it’s on the person making the assertion to back it up with evidence but you do you.
IchNichtenLichten
joined 1 month ago
I mean ... that's just not true.
That ship has sailed. With renewables and storage nuclear makes no financial sense and dispatchable power doesn't work well with base load generation.
There is no meaningful discussion to be had
Yeah, that's the vibe I'm getting as well. See ya.
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided.
All the way through it felt like there was more coming until there wasn't, it just fizzled out.
I’ll provide a list and then you’ll be like “congress didn’t declare war, that’s not a war!”
Isn't that the point though? All you're doing is making an assertion without evidence thereby dodging any hope of a meaningful discussion.
Alternatively, "Ah, you caught me chatting shit, well done you."
Never have a looked forward to owning an EV as much as I do today.
I mean, you could do the bare minimum and cite examples to back up your claim. Why is that a problem?
Nuclear is way more expensive than renewables, it’s not public appetite, it’s that it’s impossible to get funding if you can’t get a government to cover the cost. Another reason lenders are jumpy is that nuclear frequently goes way over budget and takes longer than initially estimated.
By the way, last I checked SMRs don’t exist in any meaningful capacity.
Sodium ion batteries are already on the market, they’re much cheaper than lithium, work across a far wider range of temps, they don’t catch fire, don’t lose capacity over many charge cycles, and sodium is cheap and abundant. New nuclear takes at least 10 years to build, typically longer. By then sodium batteries will be everywhere, as well as repurposed batteries from older EVs.
What’s the argument for new nuclear? Make it make sense.