A realistic understanding of their costs and risks is critical.

What are SMRs?

  1. SMRs are not more economical than large reactors.

  2. SMRs are not generally safer or more secure than large light-water reactors.

  3. SMRs will not reduce the problem of what to do with radioactive waste.

  4. SMRs cannot be counted on to provide reliable and resilient off-the-grid power for facilities, such as data centers, bitcoin mining, hydrogen or petrochemical production.

  5. SMRs do not use fuel more efficiently than large reactors.

[Edit: If people have links that contradict any the above, could you please share in the comment section?]

  • solo@kbin.earthOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    My personal stance is that sustainability cannot be achieved within capitalism due to its model of eternal growth. We can have one or the other, but not both.

    So creating more energy could not be the solution. Creating less demand would be, and the demand comes from industries.

    More often than not, I it seems to me this discussion about clean energy is a deflection of the real problem which is industrialisation under capitalism. We don’t question anymore what this energy is needed for.

    • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Good news then, Microsoft is building a new multibillion dollar AI facility which will ratchet up power demands alongside the increase in power demands for crypto. Oh wait, I said good news. Uhh…

        • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          No sun to warm us, No global warming.

          But in all seriousness some of the breakthroughs in fusion reactors have me excited long term. It’s nowhere near ready yet, but we’ve hit net energy gain, just can’t sustain it well.