Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standard, White House says

Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar... by cperciva on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:09PM (#26674837)

The standard answer is "there's too much of a risk that an explosion would spread nuclear waste through the atmosphere". These days I'm not sure if it's true -- we've learned a lot about building containers which are safe even during rapid unscheduled disassemblies, and used them e.g. when sending nuclear powered rovers to Mars -- but that's the usual concern.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar... by throwaway894345 on Friday April 02, 2021 @03:14PM (#26674894)

I mean we’re wishing for a bucket that can survive terminal velocity impact with the earth and is yet light enough to ride a rocket, why not add to that wish that it could survive explosion from said rocket?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standar... by perardi on Friday April 02, 2021 @05:12PM (#26676043)

I think there’s a few orders of magnitude difference in the amount of radioactive material in an RTG in a probe bounds for Mars, and the total radioactive daughter particle output of a nuclear reactor.

[ Parent | on HN ]