Because they increased the demand so much they are seeking out their own supply. Nuclear has consistently been panned for decades because it's more expensive than other power generation.
Quoting startup like that makes the effort seem like it is an extremely recent venture.
It is 13 years old.
It has been making progress, the degree and date of success is debated and confidently claimed to be in many mutually exclusive states, which at the very least says that there are lots of people confidently making claims that are not true. I'm not going to join that fray to declare which of them is correct.
Because they increased the demand so much they are seeking out their own supply. Nuclear has consistently been panned for decades because it's more expensive than other power generation.
"Startup"
Wait until you have clean energy sources and shut it down
Quoting startup like that makes the effort seem like it is an extremely recent venture.
It is 13 years old.
It has been making progress, the degree and date of success is debated and confidently claimed to be in many mutually exclusive states, which at the very least says that there are lots of people confidently making claims that are not true. I'm not going to join that fray to declare which of them is correct.
Is it ready to provide power? No? Then I don't care what they are trying to do while they are burning a bunch of fossil fuels in the meantime
3 replies →