Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Friendly reminder that the US does have such a program (the Navy's nuclear propulsion program), and several reactors are commissioned every year.


One of the core problems with nuclear is the size and scale of risk posed by cost cutting and neglect over its lifetime, especially the waste. People neither trust for-profit enterprises or present/future governments with that sort of responsibility (and with empirically justifiable reasons). I’m aware newer models are stated to be significantly safer, but assurances mean little when these institutions have repeatedly lied and failed in the past.

Either way, US carriers are probably one of the safest places for nuclear, as they’re mission critical for the life of the carrier and most likely to receive the utmost care… Plus the US has a long history of rubber stamping virtually unlimited funds to solve any military problem, whether the people approve or not. The handling of the waste is still a major concern, but what about the consequences of a torpedo compromising the reactor in warfare?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: