←back to thread

Google commits to buying power generated by nuclear-energy startup Kairos Power

(www.wsj.com)
589 points atomic128 | 3 comments | 14 Oct 24 19:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
sensanaty ◴[15 Oct 24 09:17 UTC] No.41846630[source]▶
God I'm so conflicted.

On the one hand, I'm glad we're finally slowly letting go of the BigOil(tm) propaganda against nuclear. The fact that we're still burning dead dinosaurs to power our society and relying on windmills is insane to me.

On the other, a nuclear startup, presumably some VC-backed monstrosity who will only care about making the most money (aka cutting every conceivable corner there is to cut) possible, sounds like a recipe for fucking disaster just waiting to happen sooner rather than later.

replies(1): >>41846652 #
DrBazza ◴[15 Oct 24 09:21 UTC] No.41846652[source]▶
> cutting every conceivable corner there is to cut

Do you think SpaceX cut every conceivable corner to make money? Nuclear (and space), are heavily government regulated. It isn't perfect a safety net but it works.

replies(1): >>41846711 #
sensanaty ◴[15 Oct 24 09:31 UTC] No.41846711[source]▶
If SpaceX cuts corners, some rockets fall over a field in Texas/the ocean somewhere. Not a great thing to have happen, but the damage is pretty minimal all things considered.

If a nuclear power plant-owning VC-backed startup cuts corners because their shareholders expect 3 cents more of profit YoY on their earnings report, we get a nuclear meltdown that shuts off an area the size of a small city for a century.

These startups can barely keep passwords secure, I don't trust them and their VC psycho buddies for a second with something as potentially powerful as nuclear energy.

replies(2): >>41846877 #>>41847271 #
1. DrBazza ◴[15 Oct 24 09:57 UTC] No.41846877[source]▶
There are meltdown-free designs as engineers have learnt from previous problems.

That's exactly the point of government regulation, want to build a privately developed and operated commercial nuclear reactor? Requirement #1: it cannot be physically possible to have a meltdown.

Pretty much the same way jet liners have black boxes, round windows, no smoking, seat belts, etc. The FAA regulates and legislates that.

The irrational fear of nuclear power is just that.

replies(1): >>41847007 #
2. sensanaty ◴[15 Oct 24 10:18 UTC] No.41847007[source]▶
You misunderstand my fears. I'm not fearful of Nuclear power, I'm fearful of VCs and by extension the kind of behavior they encourage.

Aviation is, as you pointed out, heavily regulated, yet that didn't stop the profit-seeking vultures from causing the Boeing-MAX fiasco. There are countless instances of private equity ruining everything they touch while covering things up to avoid repercussions for getting caught (if they ever even come), what makes you so sure this time it's going to be different?

replies(1): >>41847257 #
3. DrBazza ◴[15 Oct 24 11:00 UTC] No.41847257[source]▶
Nuclear is held to an entirely different and higher standard, even to aviation. There isn't any other field that is so critically examined under a microscope by governments.

VC companies have to meet the regulatory criteria. There aren't any safety corners that they can realistically cut without falling foul of regulation and inspection.