“In Theory” is doing a ton of hard work in the title to cover that up. In theory we could run internal combustion engines on sawdust, or fly using helium party balloons, but they’re not good ideas when you look at the full checklist of pros and cons.
Presumably you're suggesting nuclear because it's carbon free. But if that's the goal, both wind and solar are cheaper now. So nuclear would be a misallocation of resource, reducing the ability to spend on other efforts.
And if that carbon-free electricity is going to charge the batteries of machinery to do this, wind and solar will be just as good at that.
Funny how with reactors always the new designs are "safer" or "100% safe". Until time passes, and those are the "old unsafe designs". It's like there's an industry selling and promoting them each time (no, wait...)
