Give_me_the_science
Give_me_the_science t1_j5ct2ig wrote
Reply to comment by TheRealEvanG in Eye-popping new cost estimates released for NuScale small modular reactor by paulfdietz
I didn't say battery, I said storage. There's literally dozens of methods and they all are cheaper than nuclear
Give_me_the_science t1_j5cf7zr wrote
Solar, wind and storage. Cheaper to maintain and build, plus more reliable.
Edit: I'm not anti nuclear, it's just not economical vs what I'm suggesting. It just takes engineering and planning to make it work. Pumped hydro, thermal sand storage, iron air batteries (no lithium), compressed air is even cost effective. Read up, nuclear, coal, gas are all going to be more expensive vs storage solutions.
Give_me_the_science t1_j3sb5o6 wrote
Reply to ISO NASA JPL or others working in the space, satcom, et al industries who are also into Steampunk. by MadamePerry
Try r/space or r/steampunk
Give_me_the_science t1_ix2be1r wrote
It's a real missed opportunity to not to live stream some events from up there...
Give_me_the_science t1_is1pu4i wrote
Reply to comment by Turget in Big Googly Eyes Could Make Autonomous Cars Safer For Pedestrians by greenappletree
Lol, I do too
Give_me_the_science t1_is1dwwh wrote
This is completely ridiculous.
Give_me_the_science t1_j8ygfnd wrote
Reply to Wild Speculation and Futurology Rules by Moving-Target-00
Welcome to Reddit.
People must think that as moderators we're spending all day reading all comments from our 18.2 million members. We don't and that would be insane. Instead, we split the work up and each of us are assigned just 1 million to follow and police. /s
If you want to post something like your s-curve hypothesis and it's backed up by some semblance of credible sources, cool, but posts that just come across as crazy rants don't work. People will downvote the post and the comments will be mocking in nature.
Evidence based on a plausible hypothesis for the future are welcome.