6 ms·

What about taxpayers who are sick of bailing them out? In Illinois, we have multiple nuclear plants that deliver a large % of our energy. Taxpayers have also h

What about taxpayers who are sick of bailing them out? In Illinois, we have multiple nuclear plants that deliver a large % of our energy. Taxpayers have also had to bail out the nuclear companies because they cannot manage their plants. There is currently another bailout bill being discussed. [1] Are “massive corporate bailouts” preferred to “massive government expansion”? Is it possible that, in practice, nuclear isn’t the silver bullet people on HN claim? [1] https://news.wttw.com/2021/08/17/bye-bye-byron-exelon-prepares-shutter-illinois-nuclear-plants https://news.wttw.com/2021/08/17/bye-bye-byron-exelon-prepar...

graderjs 5y ago
It's possible the plants had to be bailed out because the industry is 'sickly' and survives on subsidies, or is choked by regulations, and so cannot find a robust equilibrium via a more free market. I guess from that point of view, if you want to make nuclear work as power, then take your hands off, and let people make money off it, but have enough of a structure there to protect the population. I guess it's not easy, but it's probably easier than everyone thinks.
- long_time_gone 5y ago
  It’s odd how you only view the issue from the “point of view” you created from thin air. Maybe try to take a step back, remove underlying assumptions, and learn how things are playing out in the real world. Excelon is a publicly traded, for-profit company. They operate as a utility and have $30 billion+ annual revenue. [1] Unlike all the other utilities in Illinois, they continually come to taxpayers asking for bailouts. Maybe it’s just them, or maybe the government is at fault, maybe there is another factor. Either way, it seems that many pro-nuclear folks on HN simply ignore the real world costs in favor of ideological (or “gotcha”) arguments. [1] https://www.google.com/finance/quote/EXC:NASDAQ https://www.google.com/finance/quote/EXC:NASDAQ
  - graderjs 5y ago
    Well you know the real, but I don't see you coming up with any solutions. > $30 billion+ revenue That's revenue. What's the profit? It's not going to work unless you let people make money. I'm not pro-nuclear. I'm not anti. I don't have skin in the game, and yeah, I don't know anything about this. Or your particular situation. But maybe that outsider perspective is something you need. I'm just thinking. About systems and how to make this efficient. Maybe you should try that too. But yea, those bailouts you mentioned, they're for unprofitable plants in Byron and Dresden. So don't pay them, and let them fail. So what? Get elec from gas. It's cheaper anyway. Or, factor in the cost of emissions, and pay the nuke guys more for making clean. Either way it's not the fucking company's problem of not being able to manage it. It seems like it's the state's issue of not being able to allocate its resources properly, and letting itself fall in the trap of politicizing and blame pointing, rather than solution finding. It's not the companies responsibility to run the plant at a loss. That's the state's got to solve that problem. This is a fucking non-issue. The plant has power that's too expensive: So let it die. Oh, but it's good power, it can't die: So keep it alive. Problem solved. Either way, it's not gonna help if you pretend, "Oh I'm such a big expert, I'm so right about this and non one else is," right? That's not gonna help. You got angry at me 'cause I had some idea about this. It's not my fault--No point blaming anyone else or angry at me--it's your (IL, Chicago, politicians' and peoples') responsibility to fix this. It's not mine. I just had an idea. And it's a pretty good idea too: Let the fucking market decide, don't get bogged down.
    - long_time_gone 5y ago
      ==That's revenue. What's the profit? It's not going to work unless you let people make money.== Instead of looking it up, you have decided to create a new strawman argument. Excelon had net income of $1.9 billion in 2020, $2.9 billion in 2019, and $2.0 billion in 2018. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/EXC/financials?p=EXC https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/EXC/financials?p=EXC ==But yea, those bailouts you mentioned, they're for unprofitable plants in Byron and Dresden. So don't pay them, and let them fail. So what? Get elec from gas. It's cheaper anyway. Or, factor in the cost of emissions, and pay the nuke guys more for making clean.== These are gigantic plants that employ loads of people (entire towns) and deliver electricity to millions. Excelon takes advantage of this political realty by threatening to shutdown the plants every few years without a state bailout. ==You got angry at me 'cause I had some idea about this. It's not my fault--No point blaming anyone else or angry at me--it's your (IL, Chicago, politicians' and peoples') responsibility to fix this. It's not mine. I just had an idea. And it's a pretty good idea too: Let the fucking market decide, don't get bogged down.== Is this a serious response? I "got angry at you" by responding to your comment and adding real-world examples? Sorry for hurting your feelings. This is all a distraction from the main point. Illinois gets the highest percentage of energy from nuclear (54%) of all US states. At the same time, the nuclear operator has to continually come back to the state for bailouts. This does not square with what I hear from the "pro-nuke" crowd (high initial costs, low ongoing costs). I am simply asking for an explanation of why that wouldn't happen on a larger level if we invest more heavily in nuclear as a country.

graderjs 5y ago

It's possible the plants had to be bailed out because the industry is 'sickly' and survives on subsidies, or is choked by regulations, and so cannot find a robust equilibrium via a more free market. I guess from that point of view, if you want to make nuclear work as power, then take your hands off, and let people make money off it, but have enough of a structure there to protect the population. I guess it's not easy, but it's probably easier than everyone thinks.

long_time_gone 5y ago
It’s odd how you only view the issue from the “point of view” you created from thin air. Maybe try to take a step back, remove underlying assumptions, and learn how things are playing out in the real world. Excelon is a publicly traded, for-profit company. They operate as a utility and have $30 billion+ annual revenue. [1] Unlike all the other utilities in Illinois, they continually come to taxpayers asking for bailouts. Maybe it’s just them, or maybe the government is at fault, maybe there is another factor. Either way, it seems that many pro-nuclear folks on HN simply ignore the real world costs in favor of ideological (or “gotcha”) arguments. [1] https://www.google.com/finance/quote/EXC:NASDAQ https://www.google.com/finance/quote/EXC:NASDAQ
- graderjs 5y ago
  Well you know the real, but I don't see you coming up with any solutions. > $30 billion+ revenue That's revenue. What's the profit? It's not going to work unless you let people make money. I'm not pro-nuclear. I'm not anti. I don't have skin in the game, and yeah, I don't know anything about this. Or your particular situation. But maybe that outsider perspective is something you need. I'm just thinking. About systems and how to make this efficient. Maybe you should try that too. But yea, those bailouts you mentioned, they're for unprofitable plants in Byron and Dresden. So don't pay them, and let them fail. So what? Get elec from gas. It's cheaper anyway. Or, factor in the cost of emissions, and pay the nuke guys more for making clean. Either way it's not the fucking company's problem of not being able to manage it. It seems like it's the state's issue of not being able to allocate its resources properly, and letting itself fall in the trap of politicizing and blame pointing, rather than solution finding. It's not the companies responsibility to run the plant at a loss. That's the state's got to solve that problem. This is a fucking non-issue. The plant has power that's too expensive: So let it die. Oh, but it's good power, it can't die: So keep it alive. Problem solved. Either way, it's not gonna help if you pretend, "Oh I'm such a big expert, I'm so right about this and non one else is," right? That's not gonna help. You got angry at me 'cause I had some idea about this. It's not my fault--No point blaming anyone else or angry at me--it's your (IL, Chicago, politicians' and peoples') responsibility to fix this. It's not mine. I just had an idea. And it's a pretty good idea too: Let the fucking market decide, don't get bogged down.
  - long_time_gone 5y ago
    ==That's revenue. What's the profit? It's not going to work unless you let people make money.== Instead of looking it up, you have decided to create a new strawman argument. Excelon had net income of $1.9 billion in 2020, $2.9 billion in 2019, and $2.0 billion in 2018. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/EXC/financials?p=EXC https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/EXC/financials?p=EXC ==But yea, those bailouts you mentioned, they're for unprofitable plants in Byron and Dresden. So don't pay them, and let them fail. So what? Get elec from gas. It's cheaper anyway. Or, factor in the cost of emissions, and pay the nuke guys more for making clean.== These are gigantic plants that employ loads of people (entire towns) and deliver electricity to millions. Excelon takes advantage of this political realty by threatening to shutdown the plants every few years without a state bailout. ==You got angry at me 'cause I had some idea about this. It's not my fault--No point blaming anyone else or angry at me--it's your (IL, Chicago, politicians' and peoples') responsibility to fix this. It's not mine. I just had an idea. And it's a pretty good idea too: Let the fucking market decide, don't get bogged down.== Is this a serious response? I "got angry at you" by responding to your comment and adding real-world examples? Sorry for hurting your feelings. This is all a distraction from the main point. Illinois gets the highest percentage of energy from nuclear (54%) of all US states. At the same time, the nuclear operator has to continually come back to the state for bailouts. This does not square with what I hear from the "pro-nuke" crowd (high initial costs, low ongoing costs). I am simply asking for an explanation of why that wouldn't happen on a larger level if we invest more heavily in nuclear as a country.