> limitless clean energy source

Like the guy you're responding to, I'm not a nuclear hater. We also have other "limitless clean energy sources" however, wind and solar.

How is nuclear going to benefit humanity in ways electrical energy hasn't already? We haven't been energy constrained in the past 10-20 years. It really doesn't seem like additional energy production is going to make that much of a difference.

▲

throwawayffffas 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

There are hard limits on wind and solar.

▲

otikik 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

“Limitless” in that context means “it still happens in a cloudy week with no wind”

▲

mulmen 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

That is what storage and long distance transmission are for. It’s very hard to take these tired arguments seriously.

	▲	otikik 16 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		With our current rate of storage and spending, storage would last hours at most. Long distance transmission on the scale where we would not get short of power is a project as big, if not bigger, than nuclear reactors.
	▲	mpweiher 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Both of these are not feasible solutions for industrial economies.

▲

delusional 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd like to see a prior for that use of that word, otherwise you're just making stuff up. Please use words to say things.

	▲	otikik 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ok