SadoMacho
spanker of civilizations
Only in New Zealand do they speak of fussion. Much like they also speak of fush and chups.
Everybody else speaks about fusion.
I do hope you Dutch is as good as my English
What is the least useful building in RFC?
- Thread starter blizzrd
- Start date
I do hope you Dutch is as good as my English
blizzrd
Micromanager
I hope you didn't think that I thought New Zealand was in the Netherlands.
I was of course talking about the islands that are to the east of Australia.
I was of course talking about the islands that are to the east of Australia.
onedreamer
Dragon
Bah, maybe you don't realize it, but a Nuclear Plant needs more fresh water than it needs Uranium.
And the least useful to your empire. Though it is very useful if your enemies have it.SadoMacho
spanker of civilizations
I know, I live not far from a nuclear plant and I see the vapour comming out the cooling towers, but without uranium, the plant wouldn't produce much power, even if it had all the water in the world.
With fusion (beter like this?), you would only need the water for the deuterium and some lithium the will give the tritium and absorbe the neutrons, but in a fission plant, one needs uranium.
onedreamer
Dragon
yeah but you don't need a significant amount of uranium to necessarily justify its strategic requirement for the nuclear plant, if it's really so undesired I think it's a fair rebalancing. Coal plant is early but polluting and needs coal, hydro plant is later, doesn't pollute but you need a river, nuclear plant would be the latest, but have no requirement yet a small chance of meltdown. Compare the resource need for an year for a coal plant to a nuclear plant:
nuclear plant: 30 tons of enriched uranium (or 200 natural uranium).
coal plant: 2 600 000 tons of coal.
There is a huge difference but in Civ the amount needed is the same.
You don't need iron to produce Riflemen either, or stone for buildings such as walls or monasteries. Hard to make a wall without stone, no ? ^^
nuclear plant: 30 tons of enriched uranium (or 200 natural uranium).
coal plant: 2 600 000 tons of coal.
There is a huge difference but in Civ the amount needed is the same.
You don't need iron to produce Riflemen either, or stone for buildings such as walls or monasteries. Hard to make a wall without stone, no ? ^^
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
But uranium is such a controlled substance that if you don't have access to it, you are not likely to get it unless you buy it from another civ. Witness Iran and North Korea--I'm sure they're paying a good price for their uranium from some African country...wikipedia says:
Almost all of the uranium production is exported, under strict International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards against use in nuclear weapons.
So just like you can build a coal plant without coal, you can build a nuclear plant without uranium, but neither one is functional without its fuel.
Almost all of the uranium production is exported, under strict International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards against use in nuclear weapons.
So just like you can build a coal plant without coal, you can build a nuclear plant without uranium, but neither one is functional without its fuel.
onedreamer
Dragon
Uranium used in power plants can be bought pretty easily and in "small" quantities. Uranium for nuclear tests and weapons is another story. It isn't the same as the game mechanic.
Similar threads
