- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or # to comment.
It’s kinda wild that there is a science that allows us to harness an almost limitless power of molecules for almost entirely clean energy, but the US just wants to literally burn ancient dinosaur fossils for energy despite it being a major cause for the total collapse of the environment.
Just barbarian level shit.
deleted by creator
Remember when we first figured out how to do this and everyone though that by the 2020s we’d be running nuclear powered cars and vacuum cleaners and shit?
Yeah me neither cause I wasn’t born yet but still, why couldn’t I have been born into that world
I was born in the 90s but grew up reading Foundation books. I thought for sure we’d get nuclear powered everything
I get the sentiment but you definitely don’t want nuclear powered vacuum cleaners.
I get the sentiment but I definitely want a nuclear vacuum cleaner
As long as it’s a Miele and not a fucking Dyson
I don’t know, my Dyson works great.
The cordless changed my life.
That one is nice. My friend has it.
I have the corded, pet hair one. Damn, that shit is powerful.
Honestly it’s kind of a ridiculous concept. It’s way more efficient to have one big plant generating power and then send that power to all the location it’s needed then have a million tiny engines everywhere. That’s why cars are so damn inefficient.
Early train engineers figured this out, before widespread use of electricity they were trying to make trains that were driven by long vacuum tubes powered by one big pump station cuz that was more efficient (on paper at least) than having a big fuck off steam engine dragging around all it’s own water and coal.
So have one big nuke power plant and then just have all the cars run off pantographs.
One big power plant is more efficient, but also a single point of failure. Having multiple medium-sized power plants is more reliable.
Anyone who gets most of their electricity from nukes already has a nuke powered vacuum.
Yeah me neither cause I wasn’t born yet but still, why couldn’t I have been born into that world
zoomer?
I don’t believe it. You’d have to convince me that the capacity to build a nuclear reactor even exists in the us anymore.
can’t wait until elon musk unveils the CyberReactor and it blows up and idk causes the yellowstone eruption
He’s gonna watch that movie where people drill into the core of the earth and then “invent” geothermal energy and activate Yellowstone on purpose
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah same with the carriers. They’re currently replacing them all with new (slowly)
Oh yeah, I think they were supposed to build a couple of those for Australia. I wonder how that’s going.
they could pay russia to build it :D
tbs the article says the US is still the leader in nuclear production
Besides bombing the global south, what isn’t the US decades behind China in?
Killing americans.
deleted by creator
Communism kills 9 billion Americans a year.
The US is infinitely behind because the US does not have the political capability to build any nuclear power anymore.
deleted by creator
how hard can it be? it’s basically bombing a reactor in reverse.
You’d think the US would be all about it then.
in reverse. so no, that’d be the SU.
and anyway, bombing a reactor in reverse means you end up with a bomb and a reactor, and the US doesnt make things.
You mean removing freedom from a reactor?! No thanks.
good point, there’s no path for US to actually catch up
they have to be more than 15 behind
lol wouldn’t be surprised if this is a wildly optimistic estimate
They have to write something that sounds plausible against the backdrop of american exceptionalism.
Looking at Wikipedia, the US has brought 2 new nuclear reactors online at a plant in Georgia this decade. Meanwhile, China, has brought 8 online in the same time span. Before those 2 reactors, the US only brought 1 other online since 1996, and that one began construction in 1973. If I counted correctly, China has brought 54 online and operational in that same period, all since 2002. Most have a capacity of at least a gigawatt like the most recently completed US reactors. China also has 25 reactors already under construction, while the US has none. Just 9 that are planned. Also, the US hasn’t managed to get a reactor operational within 10 years of the start of construction since 1987, while most of China’s recent new reactors have taken around 6 years from start of construction to operation.
Some of China’s reactors are designs from US companies, so the US clearly has the ability to design competitive reactors. Building them is another story though.
you cant have a profitable nuclear reactor so the us doesn’t make them
Rookie numbers
15 years behind, and counting
LOL
no more half measures walter
“Richest” country in the world btw
