Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

urmomaisjabbathehutt t1_j7ha0w3 wrote

Reply to comment by GlockAF in Rolls-Royce Nuclear Engine Could Power Quick Trips to the Moon and Mars by darthatheos

I don't see a reason to think that there is no rute to decarbonizing without nuclear power, i don't see any reason to think that as the "inevitable " or "correct" conclusion

I see many reasons why nuclear in space can be useful and desirable at least till we have fusion which we don't have

i don't see the need to proselitize the use of nuclear fission as energy on the ground in an thread about the use of nuclear propulsion in space

−1

toothpastetitties t1_j7huhzs wrote

Because there is no way to decarbonise without nuclear energy doing the “heavy lifting”- keep in mind this is only for energy purposes. This does nothing for the other uses of hydrocarbons.

Renewables are not a viable solution to providing consistent clean energy- as abundant as wind, flowing water, and photons are, the machinery used to convert to electricity don’t produce enough, long enough, or consistently enough. Nuclear energy provides energy at any time of day, any load, any external environmental factor. Doesn’t give a shit. And with people mass buying electric cars, on top of consuming electricity as normal, our infrastructure is in for one hell of a ride.

I don’t get why this is such a hard concept for the Reddit hive mind to understand. You can’t power a country exclusively on solar panels and windmills. We need nuclear energy. It’s a no brainer. The longer we argue the longer the transition is delayed.

11