Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree. And putting A.I. in charge of it, pure lunacy.
That's how you get intentional meltdowns when A.I. decides to exterminate humans SkyNet style.
No one's saying AI is going to run the plant.
Anonymous wrote:What does it say that TMI has a guaranteed customer for all of its electricity and it still needs the federal gov’t to give them a $1.6 billion loan guarantee.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a solar bomb explosion, so I think solar is a better investment.
Those are very different processes. Might as well say you don't trust gas powered cars because of napalm.
As a chemist the amount of fear mongering and disinformation, even demonstrated in this very post, is frustrating. People need better scientific literacy.
I will have you know that this area is full of highly-educated people with Ivy degrees.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a solar bomb explosion, so I think solar is a better investment.
Those are very different processes. Might as well say you don't trust gas powered cars because of napalm.
As a chemist the amount of fear mongering and disinformation, even demonstrated in this very post, is frustrating. People need better scientific literacy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think the major problem with nuclear power is NOT safety. There are safety issues but that is not why I can count the new 21st century US nuclear power plants on one hand.
The issue is cost and complexity.
The newest US units are at Georgia Power's Vogtle plant. Construction started in 2009 with one unit online in 2023 and the other earlier this year. Total cost: $30 billion. Those figures are about double the expected construction time and double the expected cost. Even the simple reactivation of the unit at Three Mile Island will depend on a $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee.
Aside from some token, small demonstrations there are zero new nuclear power plants under development in the U.S. We will keep the existing fleet going but that's it. The industry will continue to stab at the straw man safety issue but the truth is they are not cost competitive. That's why they aren't getting built.
We've known about climate change and the challenge of zero carbon power generation for at least 20 years. The nuclear industry had a HUGE window to develop a viable business model for nuclear power. I'm going to say they don't have one. As Clara Peller famously said, "Where's the beef?"
There is always the small modular reactor approach. You could just drop those off near a data center and pick them up when ready to refuel.
The nuclear industry has faced a smear campaign from the uneducated. Unfortunately, we seem to elect these uneducated to be our politicians.
Sure. Chernobyl is just a smear campaign.
Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a solar bomb explosion, so I think solar is a better investment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think the major problem with nuclear power is NOT safety. There are safety issues but that is not why I can count the new 21st century US nuclear power plants on one hand.
The issue is cost and complexity.
The newest US units are at Georgia Power's Vogtle plant. Construction started in 2009 with one unit online in 2023 and the other earlier this year. Total cost: $30 billion. Those figures are about double the expected construction time and double the expected cost. Even the simple reactivation of the unit at Three Mile Island will depend on a $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee.
Aside from some token, small demonstrations there are zero new nuclear power plants under development in the U.S. We will keep the existing fleet going but that's it. The industry will continue to stab at the straw man safety issue but the truth is they are not cost competitive. That's why they aren't getting built.
We've known about climate change and the challenge of zero carbon power generation for at least 20 years. The nuclear industry had a HUGE window to develop a viable business model for nuclear power. I'm going to say they don't have one. As Clara Peller famously said, "Where's the beef?"
There is always the small modular reactor approach. You could just drop those off near a data center and pick them up when ready to refuel.
The nuclear industry has faced a smear campaign from the uneducated. Unfortunately, we seem to elect these uneducated to be our politicians.
Anonymous wrote:I think the major problem with nuclear power is NOT safety. There are safety issues but that is not why I can count the new 21st century US nuclear power plants on one hand.
The issue is cost and complexity.
The newest US units are at Georgia Power's Vogtle plant. Construction started in 2009 with one unit online in 2023 and the other earlier this year. Total cost: $30 billion. Those figures are about double the expected construction time and double the expected cost. Even the simple reactivation of the unit at Three Mile Island will depend on a $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee.
Aside from some token, small demonstrations there are zero new nuclear power plants under development in the U.S. We will keep the existing fleet going but that's it. The industry will continue to stab at the straw man safety issue but the truth is they are not cost competitive. That's why they aren't getting built.
We've known about climate change and the challenge of zero carbon power generation for at least 20 years. The nuclear industry had a HUGE window to develop a viable business model for nuclear power. I'm going to say they don't have one. As Clara Peller famously said, "Where's the beef?"
Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a solar bomb explosion, so I think solar is a better investment.
Anonymous wrote:I've never seen a solar bomb explosion, so I think solar is a better investment.