Fact: nuclear energy is perfectly safe and cannot blow up

File: 15183768e0.jpg (70KB, 550x458px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 550x458px

Fact: if you start your sentence with the word "Fact", it indicates that your premise is shaky and you are trying to set the reader up to assume there is evidence behind your assertion.

TRUE FACT.

Chernobyl.

>>728405423
Google it it is literally impossible for nuclear power to explode there is absolutely no danger involved

>>728405533
Chernobyl was mis managed and poorly setup and even then it was not an explosion it was a meltdown we have come a very long way since

>>728405533
you should read about how chernobyl actually happened

imagine people trying to make a nuclear reactor blow up as hard as they could, intentionally, and then ignoring multiple repeated warnings that it was going to blow up, and in fact then disengaging safeguards which stop it from blowing up

thats basically what went down

>>728405713
Holy shit I'm believing you.
STAHP

>>728405809
Google it retard

>risk of carcinogens introduced to environment from mining fuels / operation

>mid-term power, lasts about ~150 years before fuel runs out

>'safe' but not clean

>not as viable as solar / hydro / thermal combinations of power

>>728405809
no seriously read about it, you get to read about some real nigga shit

>two engineers swam up a duct of completely radioactive water, knowing theyd die within hours
>if they didnt do this the plant would have actually exploded, effectively like a nuclear bomb going off

>>728405668
There were explosions at Chernobyl fuccboi.

Shill your nuclear shit elsewhere. This is coal country

>>728405902
>Thermal

Most power is thermal in some way

>>728405902
>>mid-term power, lasts about ~150 years before fuel runs out
? doesnt make sense
>>'safe' but not clean
byproducts can be stored or reused

>>728404605
Pro. tip: It doesn't need to blow up, just leak ;)

>>728406062
We have so many safe guards against that it's virtually impossible we're you one of these people backing solar roadways?

>>728405902
This is only true of the heavy water reactor style used, which was designed decades ago.
Thorium reactors would be massively less radioactive and impossible to melt-down.
This research was abandoned in the US during the 50's as there was no chance to get weapons grade plutonium from it.
The Chinese are currently pumping huge amount of capital into these new reactors.
The US, thanks to your current political regime will fall behind China by at least a decade.

Fukushima

>>728406427
You men like how a thorium powered car will run for 100 years on 8grams of fuel?

https://youtu.be/568iDYn8pjc

>>728406537
i saw that blast from the other side of the ocean. good one.

>>728406036
The fuels only have so long before they deplete, and the plant process needs more of the fuels from the initial design or to revamp their plant to handle a new fuel source. The chemical processes don't last forever. IIRC there was an infographic with the functional lifespan of nuclear power plants.

Nuclear byproducts are rarely valuable--just highly radioactive heavy sludge, or minerals, which no one wants to recycle, handle, or even move. They're just expensive pollutants.

Solar / is superior in pretty much every way.

>>728406631
No, I mean like real science stuff. Not made up conspiracy theory shit.
You can also have a look at pebble bed reactor. These are also inherently safe, but have a radioactive byproduct.
But, the waste is easier to manage than current reactor designs.

>>728406758
Solar is superior yes but solar roadways is as stupid as ideas come

>>728404605
it really bothers me that the cities in that picture are not located correctly within their states

>>728406758
>Solar / is superior in pretty much every way.
What about at night or when it's cloudy?

>>728404605
While it IS true that nuclear reactors themselves do not explode, nuclear reactors are FAR from being "perfectly safe".

>>728406914
This is the people who are looking forward to the hyperloop they made this map the hyperloop is another horrible idea

>>728406163
Well not really but there was a plan to make the entire EU switch to clean energy. Would require to take some of the main beaches of Spain + the upper part of the Sahara in North Africa. Huge project worth billion, but would make us independent. Sadly it would seem that technology in't that far yet. They however have already started testing it.

>>728407001
The only instances where nuclear reactors have ever melted down or leaked are cases where safety protocols were disregarded or the plant was build in an unsafe area.

>>728406163
>We have so many safe guards against that it's virtually impossible
Tell that to the Sendai earthquake.

>>728405668
the explosion at Chernobyl blew apart one of the cooling towers

>>728404605
Fact, safe, free, near endless energy will be the damnation of mankind

>>728407099
So it's perfectly safe except for when something goes wrong.

>>728406758
Accept it's not.
It actually takes a lot of energy to produce solar cells. For bulk power production photovoltaic cells are pretty terrible.
If you want to use solar for bulk, then use molten salt plants.
These use a ton of mirrors to focus solar on a tank of molten salt, then a bunch of science stuff happens to turn a turbine.
Best part is, it continues to work for a few hours after the sun goes down.
Massively more efficient than photo cells.

>>728405940
this is partially true

it wouldn't be like a nuke going off but the aftermath and radiation spreading is that would be like the aftermath of a nuke

also it did exploded its what started the event

>>728407235
It's perfectly safe except when you deliberately ignore all safety regulations. I don't expect someone like you to understand.

>>728407235
to be fair that happens so rare that it makes news every time it happens

i can think of like 3 and there are over 400 nuclear power plants in the world

>>728407162
Free, limitless energy is what will allow mankind to take the next steps in humankind's evolution.

>>728407332
is that what happened at three mile island?
i know that happened at Chernobyl
and Fukushima was designed without its passive cooling system

>>728407358
>over 400 nuclear power plants in the world
Many of which have been operating for almost 50 years. Pretty good track record for safety.

>>728407429
yep kind of my point thats far less than 1% failure rate

>>728407423
>Fukashima was designed without it's passive cooling system

No wonder everyone was pissed about that

>>728406940
They will still produce power at night or when it's cloudy, as it's neither the light or the warmth that produces power, but the UV rays, which are still present, albeit in lower quantities, when the sun isn't perfectly clear or even visible

>>728407358
>>728407332
So it's literally perfectly safe.
"Literally" as in "figuratively", though.
And let's not even discuss the whole nuclear waste storage problem that will never, ever go away. Because it's perfectly safe except when companies don't follow safety regulations. And all that happens then is extremely deadly poison that will never, ever go away contaminates soil and water which then have to be contained as even more nuclear waste which will never, ever go away.
PERFECTLY safe.

>>728407423
>is that what happened at three mile island?
The start of the problems there was that there was a coolant leak but the majority of the problems were determined to be the result of inadequate emergency response training. Who ever would have though that it would be a bad idea for poorly trained people to be operating a nuclear plant?

>>728406036
Also the plants were designed to last for 50 years, 70 years at the most. So there's a huge amount of waste / infrastructure associated with plants designed in the last century.

>>728406897
Solar is totally viable when you begin to look at large-scale continental infrastructure. Solar roadways can be done through very large grids (albeit at the cost of a lot of ambient power), grids which pull energy from the atmosphere, or through sufficiently powerful capacitors in the short term (which is expensive/wasteful).

>>728406940
>cloudy
Cloudy doesn't impact large solar grids as much as you'd think. The greatest limitation to solar technology is the capacitor (battery) capable of storing/trickling solar energy at night.

>>728407258
The energy cost is mitigated by the cleanliness of products. A nuclear plant will have products costing human resources for a much longer period of time than a solar plant. Radioactive fuels require at least some form of industrial attention in order to not be a threat to human life/health. This could mean burying radioactive materials, for example, which forces people to work with radioactive materials.

Solar cells, particularly ones that use molten salt, don't have any of the pollutant risks that nuclear power does. The cost of producing photovoltaic cells is also relatively clean and low.

>>728407587
Modern rectors can take what we've been calling waste and rerun it to generate more power. The only people who are against nuclear power are uneducated trash whose opinions inherently have no value.

>>728407521
yea it was a really really bad design

for those who don't know there a system of water in power plants that keeps moving no mater what

it does this by having water reach different temperature by virtue of location to the core and this means its always moving

this keep the core cooled even if things completely shut down or are fucked up

...except Fukushima didn't have one

>>728407465

It's still too high. Besides, it's not the failure rate people are afraid for, it's what we do with the spent nuclear fuel. We can't have a million Onkalos around you know

>>728406758
>Nuclear byproducts are rarely valuable--just highly radioactive heavy sludge, or minerals, which no one wants to recycle, handle, or even move. They're just expensive pollutants.

bzzt wrong. totally wrong. need to read up on this before you speak on it

>>728407012
reminds me of horse carriage people saying automobile was a horrible idea

>>728407654
But why do solar roadways when you can line the sides of the road with cell panels that track the sun?

>>728406940

They store energy during the day to be used at night... and cloudy weather doesn't stop the storage of solar energy...

Earth eventually gains and loses energy to the "space", but those variations happen at the rate of thousands, maybe millions of years.

Nuclear energy proposes a very reasonable trade. That destroying a insignificant ammount of matter, you gain massive ammounts of energy.

Here's the problem, it's too much. The system (Earth) a closed system on the scope human life spam.

What I'm saying is, if an nuclear plant can provide several times the ammount of energy gained from hydroelectrics, then it's the same as saying the nuclear plants add to the system, multiple times the ammount of energy needed to cover massive landscapes in water...

>>728407587
>complains about not even discussing it
>is in a discussion right now

>>728407614
do you think this problem could of been prevented with better engineering ? like in the way we build more modern plants?

>>728405940
That's the opposite of what was just said.

First it was an exercise in complete incompetency. Then all of the sudden the workers prevented bigger disasters. Make up your mind.

>>728407755
but its ok to have coal ash dumped in waterways right?

>>728407755
what about what we do with old core from nukes

we get rid of those about 50 at a time

>>728407808
Not true. You probably dont know this but the majority of the earths heat isn't from the sun. It is from thorium in the earths crust. That energy is there to stay anyway. The sun isnt actually heating up the earth as much as you think so the nuclear energy is actually already here and already part of the equation.

wtf is going to happen to westinghouse?

>>728407903
Probably, 3 Mile Island happened decades ago so I'm sure that a more modern system would have greater safety redundancy to mitigate human error.

>>728407694
>can take what we've been calling waste
contaminated soil from leaking drums?
>and rerun it to generate more power
citation please

>>728407694
No. This is a common myth between uneducated trash, but it's totally wrong. We can't use spend nuclear fuel, that's why we build structures like Onkalo and why we bury our shit. I'll say it again for the slow, WE CAN'T USE SPEND NUCLEAR FUEL

>>728407654
You cannot have a power grid which relies on solar for 100% of it's power. It is simply too variable in its output.
Power grids require stable power.
I agree that the heavy water nuke reactors are stupid. There is no reason to use them.
We should use thorium reactors, which are inherently safe, and the spent fuel will not give you 3 eyes.
The fuel is also much more abundant and easier to gather. Also without the massive environmental issues of uranium mining.

>>728405940
is it possible they just didnt understand what would happen because at the time it was untested and a unknown?

>>728407921
why do you think both can't be true? read the fucking events, holy shit.

millennials are like human vomit. argue about shit but refuse to educate yourself on it. amazing.

>>728408073
The fact that you wrote "spend" when you meant "spent" leads me to believe that you are also uneducated trash whose opinion has no value.

>>728408073
>WE CAN'T USE SPEND NUCLEAR FUEL

Yes we can. Why do you think you have any idea what you're talking about?

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel.aspx

There's also a new type of plant that is just being conceptualized that uses spent fuel directly.

>>728407930
When did I say that? I'm against the use if coal. Wind, hydro and solar is our future

>>728407817
I'm just saying that anon's definition of "perfectly safe" seems to be completely ignoring the constant creation of extremely toxic waste. The fact that the process creates byproducts that have to be sealed in barrels and buried in concrete to prevent them from leaking and killing people is "safe" in the same way that shoving all your toys under your bed is "cleaning your room".

>>728407999
Well, time will tell, or better, weather.

>>728407960
How do we get rid of those?

>>728407921
Both of them are true. The disaster was caused by an appalling level of incompetence but once shit hit the fan many of the safety workers there did some truly heroic things to keep things from getting worse.

>>728408129
No. it was a case of people not being willing to sacrifice careers to tell superiors who were wrong that they were wrong.

thats the thing they were "testing it"...at like 200% of its theoretical capabilities.

File: hanford.jpg (172KB, 874x595px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 874x595px

>>728407756
>heavy metals (UO2)
>fuel rods -- UO2, steel
>water
>storage materials

>hanford

>>728407762
capacitors, there's no way to affordably store power

>>728408104
>you cannot have a national power grid which relies on solar for 100% of its power
>you can have an international power grid
>you can have international power infrastructure
>you can have international solar power which doesn't involve carcinogenic fuel sources

>>728408178
What about leading you to believe that not everyone is anglophone?

>>728408314
stacking them in a small struckture than blowing them up

>>728405668
>FACT that nuclear power has no danger
>Pripyat is still extremely radioactive
>Yeah, but that was mis-management

Looks like your fact is subjective. You are a faggot and should go back to lurking.

>>728408321
i think you miss understand my question

they said it would be like a nuke

maybe they thought that but they were wrong

>>728404605
How is that img OPs using even remotely legit? It would take me 8 hrs to get to the eastern coast of florida to catch a train that can travel to NY in 5 additional hours?

>>728407654
>Solar cells, particularly ones that use molten salt

Think you mean solar farm brah

>>728408228
There is a huge difference between using what small amount of energy can be salvaged, and "using nuclear fuel as new fuel"

File: fallout4-luck.jpg (44KB, 947x645px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 947x645px

>>728404605
>90% of the nuclear reactors in the US are leaking.

>>728408489
You probably live in some insignificant backwater that doesn't merit being added to the loop route.

>>728408635
There is also a huge difference between saying something is impossible and not done, and the very thing you said in fact being possible and done.

eat shit.

>>728404605
What is this antinuclear propaganda.

Everyone involved in it knows very well its a gigantic son of a bitch and all possible precautions must be taken.
Than the same managers that told you nuclear is perfectly safe show up and decide not to take some of the precautions because managers gonna manage.

Nuclear is the future, fuck managers.

>>728408819
In an ideal world, science things would me managed by scientists.

>>728408732
Uh, no, I have more billionaires and millionaires living in my city than NY or CA.

Definitely not the backwaters.

>>728406023
You're a dumb nigger.

>>728409009
Just because you have rich people living in the nice parts of your town doesn't make it a significant city. Where do you live?

>>728404605
Hell yeah TX has 3 dots r3pr3s3nt n1ggaz

>>728405668
The Chernobyl disaster was not a nuclear explosion, but there were several explosions of irradiated steam that were powerful enough to completely lift and throw the concrete cover to the reactor. I know they are statistically very safe and I support nuclear reactors, but there is a lot of space between being unable to explode through fission and being completely safe.

>>728409202
The Chernobyl disaster wouldn't have happened if safety protocols were followed.

>>728407654
No, seriously, solar roadways is a very bad idea and will never be viable, simple thermodynamics and cost calculations will tell you this.

>>728409581
looked up the road that they already set it up on
its a fucking disaster

>>728404605
Yeah okay, but hyperloop is really fucking stupid and will never be viable.

>>728409709
What makes you say that?

>>728409709
>this guy who invented a bunch of revolutionary stuff made it up
>it's a bad idea though because i said so
>what? no i don't have an engineering degree

>>728409317
I never said otherwise. In addition though it was poorly constructed.

>>728409091
Fucking retard. How do you think nuclear, coal, gas, and other fuel based electricity is generated? By heating water to a gas, then using the force of that to turn generators.

>>728409802
Can't you look at the fucking map and where the stations are and see for yourself the its a bad idea? Oh, wait, you've never left the basement, let alone traveled across the country and been to major cities before and can tell that the hyperloop misses tens of millions of people.

>>728409995
In the immortal words of Albert Einstein,
"Nuclear power is one hell of a way to boil water..."

>>728409798
>>728409802
Wow, a lot of Elon Musk fanboys tonight.
Let's see.
Cost.
Prototypes thusfar have been absolute crap.
It would be a near vacuum chamber so you know, a gigantic fucking vacuum larger than the LHC. Kinda hard to maintain.
Any defect whatsoever to the tube could cause potential catastrophic failure and a pressure differential shockwave that could kill many people, if not everyone in the Hyperloop.

Elon Musk is a visionary and he's getting people thinking, but this concept can not exist in reality.

>>728410096
people who don't live in major cities aren't relevant to hyperloop travel. you don't seem to understand the point. it's for businesspeople etc

>>728410096
Early railroads also bypassed a lot of people. People in insignificant backwaters don't merit having something like the hyperloop rolled out to their town right away.

>>728410146
>Cost.
show me the full risk analysis please since you are so familiar with the costs
>Prototypes thusfar have been absolute crap.
there haven't been any prototypes. you know nothing about the technology, or you wouldn't have made this mistake

wow some kid on 4chan talking authoritatively about something he doesnt know the basics of

imagine that

>>728410178
You can't be fucking serious. Look. At. The Map. It misses 9 major cities that I can see just looking at it.

>>728410130
No it's just stupid. The nuclear contamination of Earth should be reduced as much as possible to to protect people and have a clean living space.

>>728405668
And who is to say that mismanagements won't happen again. And a nuclear plant would be a perfect place to launch a few bombs at.

By the way Google has become a shill company, so don't trust it's search results.

>>728404605

The issue is thorium vs uranium reactors. Thorium is much safer and the waste has a much shorter half-life.

The problem is that everyone uses uranium because it's the only one of the two that can be weaponized. It's also much, much, much more fucking dangerous.

>>728410327
............and?

Do you think 2 hour travel between new york and LA is irrelevant? fucking lol kid

File: 1484281615555.jpg (13KB, 230x219px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 230x219px

>>728410364
Agreed.

>>728404605
Phoenix isn't that far North. Useless map>>728404605
Phoenix isn't that far North. Map is useless.

>>728410146
Musk tries out ideas. The guy got re-usable rockets working before anyone else did. So why not just...try it? this is the problem with the US anymore and why Musk seems like some creative god, he's willing to try shit out.

Going to moon seemed impossible and retarded and then we figured it out.

Hyperloop might work, it might not, engineering test.

>>728410446
....the travel time is ~5 hours...where do you get 2 hours from?

>>728410327
The first transcontinental railroad missed a lot of major cities too. Geography and economics both play a role. I'm sure if the hyperloop is viable and rolled out across the country you would inevitably see more and more routes added.

>>728410442

Further, thorium is more efficient than uranium. Literally better in every way except that it can't be used for bombs.

>>728410364
That's exactly what Einstein meant. "One hell of a way" does not men "a really great way", or at least it didn't back then.

>>728410307
>Cost
https://www.recode.net/2016/10/26/13425592/hyperloop-one-elon-musk-cost-leaked-documents
>Prototype. Funfact, did not get up to 200 mph.

Some kid on 4chan talking about a concept that can't work, and the fact that it can't work is easy to prove.

Imagine that.
It.
Will.
Never.
Exist.

>>728410569
no, the travel time is not five hours. actually, it's 45 minutes between new york and la.

i'm done, don't respond anymore...people like you are just thoroughly worthless.

you don't read or comprehend ANYTHING and everything is just an attempt to argue because you think you're automatically right about shit for some reason

>>728410668
>>Prototype. Funfact, did not get up to 200 mph.
there has not been a prototype, since you were incapable of reading the first time.

>>728410668
prototype link
https://www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2017-01-17/students-futuristic-transportation-prototype-will-head-to-spacex
>>728410746
Calm down shitlord.

>>728406006
Take your coal somewhere else we burn wood where I'm from.
>2017 not burning wood what a loser

>>728409317
Human error has to be expected
Needs more failsaves

>>728410780
Test for the pod, not the hyperloop system. It's magnetically accelerated

once again, you didn't even bother to read. nor could you have comprehended if you did.

>>728406006
>This is coal country
I hope they give you chairs while you're waiting at the unemployment office after a machine takes your job.

>>728406940
You're actually retarded.

>>728410954
>solar shill
>but muh sustainability

>>728410903
Point remains you're not going to get a near perfect vacuum that large, and failure would be catastrophic.
Also the Hyperloop is still going to be using magnets, are you retarded?

>>728410954

No, he's actually not. Here in most parts of Alaska solar power is not reliable. I work for a civilian gov dept. that powers certain data collection sites with solar, while others are tapped into existing power lines.

None of the solar ones work with any decent level of reliability. We consider the solar powered ones garbage.

>>728411053
Sustainability aside not understanding how solar power works makes you a fool.

>>728411213
Not understanding something that's never going to be sustainable on any level doesn't make him a fool.

>>728411138
Point remains that you've been BTFO multiple times now and have FIRMLY established that you haven't read about the system you are decrying as impossible. The reason why your words don't matter is because *nobody cares what teens who don't fucking read think*

pick up a book if you want *actually* intelligent people to ever give a flying fuck what you say. Oh, and next time you google a link you think supports your argument and paste it here, I suggest you read the article for comprehension before you click "post".

>and failure would be catastrophic.
Yeah, just like if you strapped a bunch of guys to a giant rocket and shit it toward the moon. It'll never happen.

>>728411138
>failure would be catastrophic.
Hey man shit is inevitably going to happen. Might as well stay in bed if you want to stay safe.

>>728411325
>Not understanding something doesn't make him a fool.
You already lost.

>>728411325
>never going to be sustainable

chlorophyll is a perfect example of sustainable solar power

so are intercontinental hyper-structures channeling solar power around the world every day 24/7

>>728411330
Good job refuting my points and not resorting to ad hominems anon, you're really intelligent and you clearly know what you're talking about.

>>728411517
I ALREADY REFUTED YOUR POINTS, CHUMP, THIS IS THE POINT IN THE CONVERSATION WHERE I FUCKING MAKE FUN OF YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T LEARNED TO STOP TALKING YET.

That's such an ultimate problem with the internet, the fact that you pretend not to be fucking embarrassed and walk away

>>728411517
You didn't make any points you fucking half wit.

>>728411585
>>728411586
You guys are actually fucking retarded, good job.

I like how this thread started out with trying to explain the sustainability and safety of nuclear power to uneducated trash and it's been taken over by some idiot ranting about the hyperloop and the solar cunts who still believe it's the best option.

>>728411707
>I know you are but what am I?
The post.

>>728411835
>>728411585
>>728411586
Educate yourselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNFesa01llk
Or one of the many other videos with actual scientists debunking this shit.
Until then, gtfo and suck Elon's dick some more.

>>728411707
>Failure would be catastrophic, that's why it'll never happen

"You mean to tell me you're going to ride around in a giant steel thing with CONTROLLED EXPLOSIONS propelling it along? failure would be catastrophic it'll never happen"
"You intend to affix a wheeled carriage to a horse, allowing man to be pulled along at speed? Failure would be catastrophic, it'll never happen!!"
"The waves are very big. There is no island beyond our island, do not go past the big waves. Failure would be catastrophic."

Well, good thing nobody ever told HUMANITY to CARE if FAILURE WOULD BE CATASTROPHIC.

the future is space based solar or fusion

>>728412003
Kek. They would need so many moving vacuum seals, its very likely failure would occur.
The type of failure rate that wouldn't get it past a prototype phase.

>>728411953
Oh no, one guy said they can't do it

That reminds me of the physics emeritus chair of my university, a guy who worked on large hadron collider, saying in 2010 that solar panels would never be efficient enough to really deliver good return on investment, it's physically impossible because of their mechanics and materials. he went into great detail and broke it down to a molecular level

Guess what, he was absolutely fucking wrong and it was also at about that exact same time that solar panel efficiency started increasing on a geometric curve. Solar panels now produce more energy than coal in the US, and basically came out of nowhere to be the worlds most important emerging technology, all in the past 10 years or so.

>>728412003
Holy fuck, I had to come here and reply just to tell you you are a retard.

You have no understanding of the underlying concepts you are arguing about.

>>728412150
>The type of failure rate that wouldn't get it past a prototype phase.
Well they're working on a prototype so I guess we'll find out.

>>728412201
Solar panels have an efficiency of maybe 22%, not too bad.
Just because one thing turned out to be possible, doesn't mean something much less feasible will also turn out to be viable.

>>728412306
what's your formal education in mechanical engineering?

File: you wot m8.png (53KB, 769x636px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 769x636px

>>728412201
>Solar panels now produce more energy than coal in the US

>>728412201
Why has it taken them so long to achieve nothing? - how come they haven't addressed some of the key factors in the hyper loop such as 3km expansion of hyper loop tunnel in length between Cali max and min temps.

>>728412381
A true prototype would have to be a very large one.

>>728412436
Actually yes, mechanical engineer and finance degree.

>>728412448
sorry, i meant more jobs, which is correct. i know they dont produce more energy, but 50 years from now story will be very different

>>728412451
so long? hahah what type of timescale do you expect development of technologies like this to take place on? that's just your youthful exuberance getting away with you

>>728412578
I expect solutions to problems that inhibit the entire concept from running before they commence plans to build the thing.

I.e. I wouldn't want people giving money to someone who designed a cruise ship but as of yet had no way to make it float.

>>728412730
bruv, things take time.

a lot of the problems of generalized travel for normal people will be solved by autonomous interstate travel

i fully expect the fed to launch a program in about 2030 to build some super-interstates that connect NY-LA, LA-TX, TX-FL, FL-NY. you can only travel on these with certain technology built into your car, and you go like 120mph on the road. no human driving allowed.

>>728404605
Chernobyl would disagree with you.

>>728412956
Read the fucking thread, or have it read to you since you're obviously slow.

>>728412906
Why are you changing the subject?

The fact that there is not even an idea on how to solve a problem that completely invalidates the hyper loop is completely different to automated cars slowly being used more and more (which coincidentally have been demonstrated to actually work)

Stop inputting your opinion if its uneducated and irrelevant. Or at least Shitpost better.

>>728412906
I can't wait until freight is hauled by automated trucks and semi truck drivers are put in the poorhouse. I hate those pricks.

>>728413457
i was trying to educate you, but you're just a sad punk. have fun knowing everything in life when you've proven you don't even read. i expect people who act intelligent to at least attempt to play the part

>>728413635
Trying to educate you

"if we wait things will all work out"

trust me goys

>>728413793
He probably means things are being worked on by people much smarter than someone who shitposts on /b/