Hacker News Reader

I don't buy this because we could have easily kept on building nuclear power plants. There was temporarily an energy shock, but the long-term issue is insufficient demand not (energy) supply.

View on HN

Nuclear Power Plants don't move people and goods around, at least not with 1970s battery technology.

False. Trains. Surely it is no coincidence that high speed rail and nuclear power both became common around the same time.

Most of the machines that run the world don't run on electricity, but oil.

An easy to build open-source pocket sized fusion reactor would be nice.

I think the problem with nuclear energy is that it requires prior investment and return on investment is a little bit long(more than 4 years) and doesn't create enough jobs to be a sexy political option.

Then a Chernobyl would only bankrupt households and not a bunch of countries. It would be like healthcare in the United States. Families would go bankrupt since their reactor faces problems :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com