Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by roenxi on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @04:56AM
(#41846476)
The thing about R&D spending is that it is speculative. Even if that question does have satisfying answers; it is unreasonable to expect people to prove that R&D will have a commercially successful outcomes with foresight.
Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by cyberax on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @12:39PM
(#41850384)
Then why not fund fusion reactors?
Or maybe thorium reactors ON A ZEPPELIN! With microwave power transmission. After all, if the objective to spend money on research, then what can be cooler than a nuclear reactor on a blimp?
Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by roenxi on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @08:59PM
(#41854653)
If you actually think that is a good idea you can try to give it a go. There are worse things to dedicate a life to and it might have big applications in disaster recovery scenarios or something.
Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by LargoLasskhyfv on Wednesday October 16, 2024 @01:23AM
(#41855867)
You know? That sounds actually interesting because of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen-moderated_self-regula...
Hydrogen can be so hawt!1!!
Modern PWRs are just as passively safe, if they lose cooling and melt down, the molten fuel will be safely contained by the core catcher.
Uranium is also not scarce, and if we want to get into breeding reactors, existing fuel reprocessing is an established industry, on which we _already_ have spent several hundred billion dollars.