Comment on why is fossil fuel still used?
fizzle@quokk.au 1 day agoI don’t think that’s feasible. Imagine for-profit corporations being responsible for nuclear reactors floating around in international waters. I don’t trust them with diesel certainly not nuclear.
It’s easy to underestimate the maintenance requirements. Australia, UK, and US just signed a treaty to develop and produce nuclear subs. It’s a big deal. It’s going to take many decades and 100s of billions of dollars before UK and Aus have the capability to build and maintain nuclear subs.
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
For profit companies already run reactors. Putting them on a boat is well understood. Nuclear subs are more about the sub part and military tech than the nuclear part.
fizzle@quokk.au 12 hours ago
For profit companies already run reactors on dry land, which don’t move, and are heavily regulated and constantly observed.
Obviously, the risk profile is vastly different when you put the reactor on a boat.
Putting them on a boat is not well understood. Australia just doesn’t have personnel experienced with any kind of reactor. We don’t have a nuclear industry. It’s not as simple as plonking a box named “reactor” on the boat and calling it a day.