Nuclear reactors make awful targets in a conflict, not sure having many around is generally a good idea if conflict is a risk and there are alternatives.

▲

palata 4 hours ago | parent [-]

> and there are alternatives

That's a big if, though. Solar and batteries require globalisation, based on fossil fuels.

I feel like nuclear reactors are a better choice.

> in a conflict, not sure having many around is generally a good idea

On the other hand, blowing nuclear reactors could be considered a big escalation. We see with Iran and Ukraine that it's not exactly the first thing one wants to target.

▲

RandomLensman 3 hours ago | parent [-]

For shipping?

Wind, Tidal or geothermal are also around, for example.

	▲	palata 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My point was that photovoltaic is "an alternative" to nuclear reactors, but an alternative that relies on globalisation. Nuclear reactors... much less.