Perhaps my phrasing was bad. What i mean is if a person is legitimately motivated by reducing carbon emissions/pollution (as opposed to advancing a political agenda) they tend to be more open to nuclear power
Post by twetch#764
Nuclear is a great option. Whether it can be deployed and operated more cheaply than solar/battery is the question now.
Imagine being long coal hahaha
What the chain says
- Block
- 635 065
- Time
- 2020-05-15T20:59:36Z
- Signer
- 1BmBuBf5jH6LUc2BzRTrEePKVctf4dMTpg
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#764
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1BmBuBf5jH6LUc2BzRTrEePKVctf4dMTpg VerifiedReposted by (1)
Replies (3)
Its already deployed and operational over here and cheaper than solar.
imagine not being able to harvest 384.6 yotta watts efficiently.🤦♂️
I disagree. Nuclear is inherently subsidized so it’s a VERY uneconomic source of power. Nukes cannot get private disaster insurance bc no Sane insurance company will write it— see Chernobyl & Fuki cleanup costs. Nukes are the highest cost energy on earth.