3 ms·

Obama didn't shut anything down.. he appointed a nuclear physicist that said we shouldn't slow down nuclear approvals after Fukushima as Secretary of Energy[1].

Obama didn't shut anything down.. he appointed a nuclear physicist that said we shouldn't slow down nuclear approvals after Fukushima as Secretary of Energy[1]. Hell, read the description of all the Federal support since 2009 for Vogtle 3&4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_Plant#Construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_Pla... They still can't get the stupid things built. It's going to finish somewhere about 200% over budget at $25B for 2000MW and nearly a decade late. Just an absolutely calamity. Over $12k per KW. Natural gas is what, $750/KW? Wind near $1,500? Solar near $2,500? Capacity factor can only buy you so much goodwill when you can build 5x the nameplate capacity in 1/10th the time. The best thing the nuclear industry could do to save their technology would be to actually build generating plants for anything approaching the cost or schedule that they commit to when contracted. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Chu#U.S._Secretary_of_Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Chu#U.S._Secretary_of_E...

m0zg 7y ago
But, he did shut down fast breeder fuel work, without which there can't be any fast breeder reactors. Google for "GNEP Obama" and "MOX Obama" to find evidence. I'd like to point out as well that the two reasons why nuclear costs so much is the rather grotesque level of government regulation and the lack of production volume caused by aforementioned regulation. It costs a lot of money to build only a few instances of a bespoke design. It costs a lot less per unit to build dozens or hundreds of instances of the same design. And I know you will try to put words in my mouth, so here's a preemptive strike: no, I'm not against government regulation in nuclear. I'd just like to see it brought forward to the realities of the technology we have now rather than what we had 50 years ago. Point being, if we really did want to solve climate change without shutting down the economy and pushing globalist agenda, nuclear energy would be too cheap to meter by now. The fact that nuclear is not being seriously pursued tells you all you need to know about who's serious about climate change and who sees it only as a means to an end. I'd like to make a prediction here: in his second term, Trump will push Gen IV nuclear so hard, you wouldn't believe it. It's politically pernicious to push it before re-election, but after, there's no reason not to pursue a tractable, technological avenue towards reducing emissions. Big beautiful coal will die a natural death, and so will (eventually) fracking and natural gas, if this happens.
- manicdee 7y ago
  Which legislation in particular is preventing the development of a “commercial off-the-shelf” nuclear power solution at prices comparable to wind and solar on an available capacity basis?

m0zg 7y ago

But, he did shut down fast breeder fuel work, without which there can't be any fast breeder reactors. Google for "GNEP Obama" and "MOX Obama" to find evidence. I'd like to point out as well that the two reasons why nuclear costs so much is the rather grotesque level of government regulation and the lack of production volume caused by aforementioned regulation. It costs a lot of money to build only a few instances of a bespoke design. It costs a lot less per unit to build dozens or hundreds of instances of the same design. And I know you will try to put words in my mouth, so here's a preemptive strike: no, I'm not against government regulation in nuclear. I'd just like to see it brought forward to the realities of the technology we have now rather than what we had 50 years ago. Point being, if we really did want to solve climate change without shutting down the economy and pushing globalist agenda, nuclear energy would be too cheap to meter by now. The fact that nuclear is not being seriously pursued tells you all you need to know about who's serious about climate change and who sees it only as a means to an end. I'd like to make a prediction here: in his second term, Trump will push Gen IV nuclear so hard, you wouldn't believe it. It's politically pernicious to push it before re-election, but after, there's no reason not to pursue a tractable, technological avenue towards reducing emissions. Big beautiful coal will die a natural death, and so will (eventually) fracking and natural gas, if this happens.

manicdee 7y ago
Which legislation in particular is preventing the development of a “commercial off-the-shelf” nuclear power solution at prices comparable to wind and solar on an available capacity basis?