TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Modular reactors supported by ideology alone (2023)

14 pointsby AndrewDucker11 months ago

6 comments

Herz11 months ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Allison_Macfarlane" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Allison_Macfarlane</a><p>I would like to point out that the author of this article has practically based her entire life on being anti-nuclear... I&#x27;m not saying the article is worthless, but I don&#x27;t know how interesting it can be to read the words of someone who starts from a conclusion and goes backwards to refute it and to bring arguments to her assumption.<p>Also, the article start in this way...<p>&gt; In the past few years, investors, national governments, and the media have paid significant attention to small modular nuclear reactors as the solution to traditional nuclear energy’s cost and long build times and renewable’s space and aesthetic drawbacks, but behind the hype there is very little concrete technology to justify it.<p>This anti-research, anti-free-market, anti-technology rhetoric is terrible.... It&#x27;s like those who 10 years thought artificial intelligence was useless.<p>Which technologies before being properly developed have been proven from the beginning to have no defects whatsoever? It is only through iteration and perseverance that something useful, cheap, etc. is created.<p>The &quot;turning point&quot; is something that happens through investment, research and competition. To pretend it doesn&#x27;t exist by not investing in it because to some enlightened person it&#x27;s a &quot;useless&quot; technology is a counter-sense.
评论 #40709500 未加载
ZeroGravitas11 months ago
This is from last summer.<p>The NuScale project they mention as the only project that was approved got cancelled (due to the rising costs they cite) after this was published.
fwlr11 months ago
Note that after several paragraphs, the author discloses that they were the Chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2012-2014.
评论 #40704433 未加载
bell-cot11 months ago
Oof. Pretty damn damning, and from someone who certainly would know.
评论 #40704432 未加载
nobodyandproud11 months ago
Sam Altman. That explains so much.<p>I want to see the nuclear industry maintained and to survive, but I wonder now if I’ve nearly fallen victim to his methods.
评论 #40704430 未加载
orson207711 months ago
Is this article a joke? - The chapter titled &quot;Advanced reactors may make waste problem worse&quot; mentions nothing about waste. - The chapter titled &quot;Not likely to help cut emissions&quot; acknowledges that it would help cut emissions. - HALEU fuel is needed to offset the smaller size of the reactor core, which results in increased neutron leakage: nope. - &quot;Factory construction is a risk&quot;: compared to traditional, behemoth reactor construction? Really?<p>There&#x27;s more, but I&#x27;m at work. Is this article actually a joke?
评论 #40704800 未加载
评论 #40704495 未加载