Venture capitalists expect most of their bets to fail. It's very possible that none of their synthetic fuel startups will succeed. It is not at all reasonable to assume that a technological breakthrough will transpire just because venture capitalists are funding it. Otherwise, we should just sit back and let nuclear fusion solve climate change. Surely you don't think you know better than the VCs funding fusion, right?

And for what it's worth, some shipbuilders are exploring nuclear cargo ships: https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/maritime-industry-exp...

The important bit is about the timeline: At least ten yeara to proof of concept.

There is no industrial base dor this at the moment. And then there is the IRENA commission, tasked with developing a strategy to decarbonize shipping, and they went with green fuel instead of nuclear. And that commission included ship builders, operators and other domain experts.

The International Renewable Energy Agency's [1] job is to advocate for more widespread adoption of wind and solar. Nuclear power threatens that objective. This is about as naive as trusting fossil fuel companies' paid-for scientists on climate change.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Renewable_Energy...

Than take it from those folks:

https://cms.globalmaritimeforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/...

-> page 9 refernces the hydrogen and amonium based fuels

That was developed in the frame of this:

https://unctad.org/news/transport-newsletter-article-no-108-...

The IRENA page provided said information in an easier to digest form so.

The only source talking about nuclear reactors for civilian shipping was that Reuters article. Personally, I'd take exhaustive reports and internationally accepted strategies above some statement made towards Reuters.