this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
116 points (96.0% liked)
Technology
81451 readers
4598 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lol, typical American centric article.
Just outside Toronto, they're building four 300MW small modular reactors, at an existing nuclear plant, using proven designs from Hitachi, and the first one is targeted to come online by 2029 or 2030, eclipsing the Texas projects in scale, timeline, and practicality, but that literally doesn't even get a passing mention.
4 years to build a power plant is still fucking stupid when you could install 10x the solar and battery capacity in that time.
The website is called The Texas Tribune. They write articles about Texas. I really don't know why you expected them to mention Canada.
The posted headline is literally "Texas become leading ground for testing small modular reactors".
That inherently implies that places that aren't Texas, are not becoming leading grounds for testing small modular reactors, bringing those other places into the discussion.
Right now that's not the headline I'm seeing on the article though, so either they're A/B testing headlines or OP editorialized.
People in Texas aren’t known for their intellectual prowess. It’s like the Florida of the western half of the us.
It’s not really western…
I meant divided in half
Fair enough point. And while it's not the article's headline, that is the tab's label when you open it.
They are referring to the expert comments here about how SMRs can't be used for grid electricity, radiation leaks, etc.
They would rather breathe in that clean coal.
300mw are indeed a much different scale from 10mw.
I wonder if your ire is misplaced... As these are sort of different things. The 10mw reactors have different use cases, they're not really designed to be installed as part of a power plant, but more for individual on-site uses, like as a reserve power system for a hospital, or as power for a remote mining location, disconnected from the grid.
My point is just, it might make sense to not mention the larger reactors here, as they're not really the same.
I’m sure Texas will do it in the dumbest most unregulated way possible. It will be a good example of what not to do.
Not winterize them, because the feds can't tell us what to do, and then have it melt down in the next polar inversion, of which they got one this year again. It's going to be a regular occurrence now with the global weirding.
Modern reactors don't really melt down like the first few generations did. And even so, it would still be less radioactive waste than coal power.
As if we can trust anything you say after that statistic you just proffered and responded with another outlandish claim when asked what methadology was used for you coal comparison.
You're more than welcome to type a few words into Google to see that I'm right.
But since you want to be spoon fed information, Here you go
Yeah, these guys really have their heads up their asses on this.
budgeted at 17.5c/watt (CAD), that too is a boondoggle before additional Ontario taxpayer corruption.
They're not in the same game.
So how long until it's small enough to power a Pip-boy?
Asking the real questions