☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to technology@hexbear.netEnglish · 2 years agoUS 15 years behind China in nuclear power – reportwww.power-technology.comexternal-linkmessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up1103cross-posted to: technology@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1103external-linkUS 15 years behind China in nuclear power – reportwww.power-technology.com☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to technology@hexbear.netEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square38fedilinkcross-posted to: technology@lemmy.ml
minus-squareAwoo [she/her]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up27·2 years agoThe US is infinitely behind because the US does not have the political capability to build any nuclear power anymore.
minus-squarehuf [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·2 years agohow hard can it be? it’s basically bombing a reactor in reverse.
minus-squareroux [they/them, xe/xem]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoYou’d think the US would be all about it then.
minus-squarehuf [he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·edit-22 years agoin 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.
minus-squarePili [any, any]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 years agoYou mean removing freedom from a reactor?! No thanks.
minus-square☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·2 years agogood point, there’s no path for US to actually catch up
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