Hacker News Reader

Nuclear power doesn't seem too politically non viable, especially if the alternative is rapid depopulation.

Regardless of the controversy on the risks of nuclear energy, don't overestimate it's potential. We simply can't build nuclear plants everywhere we need them. We still mostly need a reduction in energy consumption and deforesting.

France derives 71% of its electricity from nuclear energy. In the US it's around 20%. So while nuclear power can't replace everything, even with current technology they could power the great majority of electricity generation.

Sure we can't simply build them everywhere. But the main barriers to building enough of them to make a big difference aren't technical.

> rapid depopulation

What exactly do you mean by this, and how would you accomplish it? Assuming, that is, that nuclear doesn't work (for whatever reason), as you've drawn a dichotomy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com