@Seven Proxies powerplants arent the size of a Mojave Desert-sized solar-farm.

The more vertical, the more farms can be had within city limits, and without damaging the city or creating farmland

@Seven Proxiesif only we could make Nuclear power plants human error free. I think this would be a good challenge for engineering and architecture.

That would cripple the farmland that exists@Reprehensibletrash

@Zephyr Blackfish No, but you're going to need a crapton of nuclear powerplants to get the same energy output. Besides, it's not like the mojave desert is some sort of "prime real estate". I mean, it's a fucking desert.

Skyscraper except there are farms on each level and 45 degree roof mirrors so the light actually gets in there

@Seven Proxies build the nuclear powerplants in the Mojave Desert for a fraction of the space and energy-cost, cuck. You'll need a "crap ton" more solar panels than you'd ever need nuclear powerplants.

@Zephyr Blackfish Sorry. The nuclear power plants required would cost more.

that is incorrect

"Muh cost for most efficient form of power generation"

Burn coal then, faggot.

Fuck solar panels.

Good. Horizontal farmlands are the most damaging thing to the environment. It's perfectly possible to take the funding from israel's yearly allowance, and repurpose it for making vertical farms for the south

Nuclear power plants are the least expensive in terms of watt per dollar

B- b- but what about muh panels?!

and they produce so much power that it offsets the time to build and cost to build

Nuclear is ebil

We can make the nuclear plants rather small, honestly

@Louis Now yes. With mass produced solar panels, no.

Nothing wrong with building more than one solution and producing more than you need.

you cant just wish mass production in place

The problem is that the more nuclear plants you have, the more likely we are to see dirty bombs used in terror attacks

@Reprehensibletrash False

@Louis No, but one can make a serious attempt at it. Which hasn't even happened yet.

But I suppose that's a demographic issue

O_o

Bombs and nuclear power plants are completly different

I'd love to see how many dirty-bombs have been used IRL

Even without them i think the risk of a dirty bomb is higher than most of us imagine.

Or if this is just pure cuckery of hypothesis

you can make a bomb into nuclear fuel but not the other way around

Because of enrichment

I don't think you actually understand what a nuclear power plant is if you actually think the waste would be used as a weapon

Its a myth

@Louis no it's really not. Proliferation is a very simplistic process, and whereas you won't be able to make a full on nuke, it's quite easy to make a bomb or even just a generator within your basement

Just ask any nuclear engineer

Its a myth

TBH, the risk of depleted uranium being used in munitions galore is bigger than dirty bombs are of being used from the same power plants.

@Reprehensibletrash how many dirty bomb attacks have there been in the past century?

@Louis You haven't looked at the prototypes I have. You think solar panels are the bulky, crappy shit they sell in retail right now.

The "future tech" are basically paper thin and could be printed like newspapers. But it requires investments and building the specialized production facilities for them.

Big chunk cost initially. Low costs in the long term.

The US have been using their depleted uranium in some rather immoral ways.