• datendefekt@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 天前

    No, just no. Nuclear might be better than fossil fuels in the short term, but there’s a lot we’re asking of from later generations.

    We have perfectly viable non-poisonous and non-radioactive solutions, but I guess renewables aren’t manly enough for the military.

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      15 天前

      Renewables still have holes in their capacity especially for more environmentally unstable regions. Got clouds solar efficiency is fucked, also pollar nights exist in some places. No water? Hydro is a non factor. Wind can in theory be maintained anywhere but has some scale issues that a military base either doesn’t want to deal with or can’t. Finally battery tech is so and so, perhaps in a decade or so it’ll be advanced enough to overcome a lot of the limits but there’s still some issues.

      Nuclear is honestly the best we have for a relatively low maintenance easily stockable power generation system. Plus here’s hoping it succeeds and reinvigorates interest in nuclear ships, kind of a shame that project was shelved during Eisenhower’s admin.