- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "Manhattan Project 2" for Nuclear Energy Push
Posted on 5/23/25 at 1:53 pm to Fun Bunch
Posted on 5/23/25 at 1:53 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
The pushback against Nuclear is stupid as frick. It is one of the most efficient, best power sources we have
The only reason why it appears some of the activists against nuclear are winning is due to its cost. Investors are not cowing to activist. They are following the business model.
Posted on 5/23/25 at 1:54 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
“If we don’t unleash American innovation and American entrepreneurs and American construction and bold moves, we will lose Manhattan Project 2.”
Manhattan Project would not have been successful without highly intelligent university professors from all around the world.
Trump is actively trying to kick them out of our country.
Just like trying to make China his sole foreign policy boogeyman but taking an isolationist stance and distancing ourselves from allies that could potentially help us isolate China.
We can't have goals and enact policy to contradict them.
This post was edited on 5/23/25 at 1:55 pm
Posted on 5/23/25 at 1:55 pm to Baers Foot
quote:
Trump is actively trying to kick them out of our country.
No. He's just telling them you can't go to Harvard.
Posted on 5/23/25 at 3:12 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Nuclear still faces one fundamental problem: cost.
Natural gas is so much cheaper.
Yep. Nuclear LCOE is something like 2x combined cycle natural gas LCOE.
That could change over time if massive demand (either from power or from LNG exports) leads to huge increases in the price of natural gas, but we aren’t seeing that yet.
It could also change to some extent if there is a major effort to remove red tape / government oversight requirements for nuclear generation.. but that kind of undermines arguments about the safety of nuclear power in the US over the past ~40 years.
Not to say that we won’t see a resurgence in nuclear. We very well might. But it’s not the cheap option many people think it is, for whatever reason.
Posted on 5/23/25 at 4:51 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The order is expected to fast track the development of nuclear power stations in the United States, which would then supply the huge data centres required for AI.
quote:
Technology companies including Microsoft and Google have embraced nuclear power as a way to meet their expanding energy needs as the US government seeks to catch up with the boom in demand.
Cool. Let them foot the fricking bill. Taxpayers should not pay for their energy needs.
Posted on 5/23/25 at 4:53 pm to Powerman
quote:
Funny how just a week ago or so people were complaining about DOD loans to fund nuclear projects because it was done by Biden
I said the same thing then: If Big Tech needs more energy they need to take some of their billions and build some plants.
This post was edited on 5/23/25 at 4:54 pm
Posted on 5/23/25 at 10:43 pm to ragincajun03

Posted on 5/23/25 at 10:44 pm to ragincajun03
We split the atom 80 years ago and we're still burning diesel in ships.
We dumb.
We dumb.
Posted on 5/23/25 at 10:44 pm to lostinbr
quote:
That could change over time if massive demand
Highly unlikely. The two biggest drivers of nuclear’s bonkers LCOE is cost of capital and o&m. You’re not going to economy of scale yourself out of those two. And the only way anything else gets close is a complete destruction of global commodity supply chains.
This post was edited on 5/23/25 at 10:46 pm
Posted on 5/23/25 at 10:57 pm to billjamin
quote:
Highly unlikely. The two biggest drivers of nuclear’s bonkers LCOE is cost of capital and o&m. You’re not going to economy of scale yourself out of those two. And the only way anything else gets close is a complete destruction of global commodity supply chains.
I don’t think nuclear gets any cheaper. I do think it might be possible (albeit unlikely) for gas to become more expensive between increasing utility demand and increasing LNG exports. But that sort of increase in the price of gas might frick the economy enough to reverse itself anyway.
OTOH, I guess we would probably see an explosion of shale gas drilling if that happened. So maybe it’s a moot point.
Posted on 5/24/25 at 5:56 am to ragincajun03
Modular nuclear reactors. Wright was at y-12 a few weeks ago.
Popular
Back to top
