Not really, Paul. I’ve followed development of these reactors for many years. Most (alll?) of these modern reactor designs have eliminated water from the heat transfer systems; they have shifted to molten salts. This eliminates several fundamental risks – you could call them errors – from earlier designs. Burying the reactors gives natural protections from all sorts of man-made and natural problems.
I wasn’t interested in responding to some vague assertion that these new designs were unsafe. I was interested if you had done your homework – and had a fact-based argument. The link I provided on the Microreactors is quite educational. Did you look up that article? If you were interested in learning, I could provide more links.
So, no, I’m not dismissive. If you were interested in a fact-based discussion, we could have that. But, so far, you haven’t presented any facts in any of your comments here.
Of course it is! It’s a perfect place to have an evidence-based discussion about alternatives. In such a discussion, we may learn that some alternatives are not viable at all.
This is a false dilemma. These are massive projects; no one individual would have “plans to do it”. OTOH, it makes perfect sense to discuss the plans from the organizations that are discussing them.
You have come to a conclusion about nuclear, and no evidence-based argument would ever convince you. You have a position, and you’re unwilling to shift it – unwilling to learn anything new.
If Matt has made an argument that a [massive] battery farm paired with a [massive] solar farm could implement highly-reliable truck recharge stations, please tell us the exact timestamp in an exact video where Matt has done that. I’m not interested in scanning a bunch of videos with little hope that Matt has ever addressed that question. His vids sound more about feelings than an evidence-based discussion rooted in cold, hard numbers. I’m more interested in a discussion of the science. And, yes, forums like this are perfect for learning about new science.
Have you ever watched/listened to anything on TWiT, ever? If it’s anything, it’s “opinions of the [tech] news”. TWiT is not a science foundation and applied science generally doesn’t have the audience of political and emotional discussion of hot topic news.
Yes! Most every week. I pick up the “show notes” for Security Now! (episode #900 here). Steve provides an exquisite evidence-based discussion of the computer and networking security issues of the week.
Maybe you’re listening to the wrong shows. Security Now! is rooted in cold, hard facts:
Episodes I hear are evidence-based discussions. Typically, opinions here are rooted in facts. While there are a few pure opinions, they are the exception on that particular show. Have you ever listened to “Security Now!”? When you listen, do you download the official Show Notes beforehand? Based on your discussion here, I don’t think you’ve ever done that.
If you make some proposal for a [massive] battery paired with a [massive] array of solar that literally doesn’t add up [to the requirements], it’s perfectly appropriate to point out. Truck drivers want reliable service. They want the solution to work; they don’t give a hoot about opinions.