3 ms·

The US government already provides massive incentives for nuclear power, but even with those incentives, nobody is building. Maybe the American nuclear industr

by sethg 16y ago

The US government already provides massive incentives for nuclear power, but even with those incentives, nobody is building. Maybe the American nuclear industry just has such an awful record of cost overruns that investors don’t want to give them any more rope. But if the Indians can run their nuclear industry in a more competent fashion, good for them.

pjscott 16y ago
The US government has a horrendous nuclear regulatory regime. If anything, they're anti-subsidizing.
- rubashov 16y ago
  Without the government's liability coverage for nuclear plants, none would ever be built at all. A nuclear plant is simply un-insurable. To all those people who insist nuclear power is very safe: no private insurance company has ever concluded the risks are sufficiently quantifiable to offer insurance.
tbrownaw 16y ago
> American nuclear industry just has such an awful record of cost overruns Due primarily to NIMBY lawsuits, IIRC. Nuclear is technically easyish, but misinformed protesters make it socially/legally messy.
- gamble 16y ago
  > Nuclear is technically easyish Not the way it's been done in the US. Every plant was essentially a one-off design, with all the risks you'd expect from a multi-billion dollar construction project with significant R&D aspects. The industry is trying to standardize on replicable reactor designs, but it's not a cakewalk. Even the French have had a lot of difficulty producing a standard reactor, and few countries have invested as much in nuclear as they have.
  - pjscott 16y ago
    This is why I'm optimistic about smaller reactors like the B&W mPower reactor, or China's HTR-PM pebble bed reactors. They're meant to be cranked out in bulk, identically, and shipped out to wherever the site is. The AP1000 also looks like a pretty impressive attempt at standardization, since it comes mostly in the form of factory-produced modules that get assembled on-site.
ScotterC 16y ago
The current energy industry is so over regulated that it completely stifles innovation. It's worse then Taggart Transcontinental

by sethg 16y ago

pjscott 16y ago

The US government has a horrendous nuclear regulatory regime. If anything, they're anti-subsidizing.

rubashov 16y ago
Without the government's liability coverage for nuclear plants, none would ever be built at all. A nuclear plant is simply un-insurable. To all those people who insist nuclear power is very safe: no private insurance company has ever concluded the risks are sufficiently quantifiable to offer insurance.

tbrownaw 16y ago

> American nuclear industry just has such an awful record of cost overruns Due primarily to NIMBY lawsuits, IIRC. Nuclear is technically easyish, but misinformed protesters make it socially/legally messy.

gamble 16y ago
> Nuclear is technically easyish Not the way it's been done in the US. Every plant was essentially a one-off design, with all the risks you'd expect from a multi-billion dollar construction project with significant R&D aspects. The industry is trying to standardize on replicable reactor designs, but it's not a cakewalk. Even the French have had a lot of difficulty producing a standard reactor, and few countries have invested as much in nuclear as they have.
- pjscott 16y ago
  This is why I'm optimistic about smaller reactors like the B&W mPower reactor, or China's HTR-PM pebble bed reactors. They're meant to be cranked out in bulk, identically, and shipped out to wherever the site is. The AP1000 also looks like a pretty impressive attempt at standardization, since it comes mostly in the form of factory-produced modules that get assembled on-site.

ScotterC 16y ago

The current energy industry is so over regulated that it completely stifles innovation. It's worse then Taggart Transcontinental