• @scratchee@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 year ago

    Yeah, one justification I’d heard was that it was a cheap and low risk way to revive the industry enough for bigger projects, but I’m not sure that’s particularly compelling.

    • @Greyghoster@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      Sounds like a very expensive argument to invest billions on the hope that something might happen 😬. Hope it’s not my money.

      • @scratchee@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes, but also literally every industry starts that way. Start small and scale up. Nuclear’s special because we did it once and then almost completely stopped building them globally for so long that the capability faded away.

        The tech shifted in the meantime, so even the knowledge that was preserved is for designs we wouldn’t want to build today.

        It’s a weird situation.