119
24/7 solar towers could double energy output
(techxplore.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
119 points (94.1% liked)
Technology
72933 readers
2531 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There are technology (reactor) demonstrations planned within the next 2-3 years, so not quite but very close. A lot of active R&D work going on right now for specific designs at a lot of companies.
So you admit they do not exist?
The technologies on which these reactor designs are based have been demonstrated previously. The specific designs are in progress and well on their way. AGR, EBR-II, and MSRE are examples.
So that's a no, then?
WTF is it with nuclear bros and their war on reality?
From how they argue, I get the impression that most of them are victims of astroturfing campaigns by the nuclear lobby tbh. The nuclear industry hates the idea to become redundant because of renewables, so they spread lies about being the solution to climate change. Like they ever gave any shits about the ecosystem, lol.
Maybe, but I've had plenty of conversations where I've bought evidence, facts, used reliable sources, etc. and I see the same people still lying their asses off.
Maybe those are the ones running the astroturfing campaigns?
Good call. Who are they shilling for though?
More or less directly for the nuclear lobby I would assume. Or did I somehow misinterpret your question?
I could see the fossil fuel lobby funding this, I'm not sure the nuclear lobby exists given how unprofitable it is.
It is not unprofitable for the corporations who run the plants but only for society as a whole. You have to consider the state funding for research and development, subsidies for construction and operation of power plants, plus the fact that the state runs and pays for the final storage facilities for nuclear waste. All those billions of taxpayer money getting systematically redistributed to the nuclear industry to offset the real expenses of nuklear power, makes it in fact an extremely profitable business. Think about it, otherwise there would never have been a nuclear industry in the first place, at least in western/capitalist economies.