Wandering Adventure Party

@breizh

Yes it doesn't produce CO2, but just why do you want nuclear? It makes no economic sense. It's a large, inflexible investment that requires constant use and future operating expenses are much higher than 0.

I've heard all the stuff you wrote before and some of it is true but it doesn't change the truth of what I wrote. I don't know why you are emotionally and ideologically invested with the nuclear steam engine but it is really annoying that you didn't even critically think about anything that I said.

And touching on a point pertaining who is lying:

The water boiler-steam engine that are common today aren't optimized for creating Plutonium yes. But all the infrastructure up until that point the fuel is put into pellets is dual use. The water boiler-steam engine is only the last component, which doesn't invalidate the point i made.

@breizh @TechConnectify uranium is neither renewable nor free to harvest at low operating costs. nuclear power is an uniquely insane upfront investment & constant operating expenses and a lot of societal operating expenses to safely store the nuclear waste. until such time it can be safely transmuted. That is also a huge investment to develop and scale that technology.

the last time nuclear power was built it was only possible because the cold war needed the technology to be dual use otherwise it would have just been building nukes to collect dust somewhere.