3 ms·

> We don't see more fission power because whenever a new fission project is started, the majority of the money is siphoned off for political patronage. However

> We don't see more fission power because whenever a new fission project is started, the majority of the money is siphoned off for political patronage. However bad an over budget nuclear plant is, an under budget one would be worse.

ncmncm 5y ago
When the extra money is not actually spent on the reactor, but is just handed around in exchange for political favors, does that really make the plant seem safer to you? (My mother used to say getting pawed at the airport made her feel safer, so I guess almost anything is plausible.) Safest are the ones that get cancelled without being finished. Which is the norm, lately. Nobody seems to ask for the money back when that happens; it must have been money well spent.
- deeviant 5y ago
  Nobody have present any evidence of any significant amount of nuclear power plant funding "being exchanged for political favors". Note, we'd need both evidence of it happening at all, then evidence that it is endemic in nuclear power plant commissioning to explain that extremely poor economic performance of nuclear power plants. > Safest are the ones that get cancelled without being finished. We are in agreement here!
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    It should suffice to note that they invariably cost at least 3x the price quoted (if not 6x) and take 2x as long to complete (if not 3x).
    - deeviant 5y ago
      Extremely complex and potentially catastrophically dangerous projects are prone to overruns, you don't say. It's strange that solar plants in general don't seem to have this issue, I guess all the people involved in solar plants are just honest people.
      - ncmncm 5y ago
        Projects that seem extremely comples and potentially catastrophic are easy to arrange overruns in, if that is what you're after. It is hard to invent bogus costs in solar installations, or excuses to stall delivery. They will probably solve that eventually. But solar projects do also seem more likely to have idealists involved.
        deeviant 5y ago
        > Projects that seem extremely comples and potentially catastrophic are easy to arrange overruns in, if that is what you're after. No, that's what you are after. And after asserting that there is some sort of worldwide conspiracy against nuclear power plants in the form of financial sabotage and graft, you have provided exactly zero evidence for your claim.
        ncmncm 5y ago
        There is no "worldwide conspiracy against nuclear power plants". (1) It does not violate laws--it is all wholly legal, from beginning to end--so, no "conspiracy". (2) It is mainly in the US, so not "worldwide". And, (3) It is not "against nuclear power": nukes are the gravy train, how could they be against nukes? They love nukes, and want us to love them; just not enough so to complete them.

ncmncm 5y ago

When the extra money is not actually spent on the reactor, but is just handed around in exchange for political favors, does that really make the plant seem safer to you? (My mother used to say getting pawed at the airport made her feel safer, so I guess almost anything is plausible.) Safest are the ones that get cancelled without being finished. Which is the norm, lately. Nobody seems to ask for the money back when that happens; it must have been money well spent.

deeviant 5y ago
Nobody have present any evidence of any significant amount of nuclear power plant funding "being exchanged for political favors". Note, we'd need both evidence of it happening at all, then evidence that it is endemic in nuclear power plant commissioning to explain that extremely poor economic performance of nuclear power plants. > Safest are the ones that get cancelled without being finished. We are in agreement here!
- ncmncm 5y ago
  It should suffice to note that they invariably cost at least 3x the price quoted (if not 6x) and take 2x as long to complete (if not 3x).
  - deeviant 5y ago
    Extremely complex and potentially catastrophically dangerous projects are prone to overruns, you don't say. It's strange that solar plants in general don't seem to have this issue, I guess all the people involved in solar plants are just honest people.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Projects that seem extremely comples and potentially catastrophic are easy to arrange overruns in, if that is what you're after. It is hard to invent bogus costs in solar installations, or excuses to stall delivery. They will probably solve that eventually. But solar projects do also seem more likely to have idealists involved.
      - deeviant 5y ago
        > Projects that seem extremely comples and potentially catastrophic are easy to arrange overruns in, if that is what you're after. No, that's what you are after. And after asserting that there is some sort of worldwide conspiracy against nuclear power plants in the form of financial sabotage and graft, you have provided exactly zero evidence for your claim.
        ncmncm 5y ago
        There is no "worldwide conspiracy against nuclear power plants". (1) It does not violate laws--it is all wholly legal, from beginning to end--so, no "conspiracy". (2) It is mainly in the US, so not "worldwide". And, (3) It is not "against nuclear power": nukes are the gravy train, how could they be against nukes? They love nukes, and want us to love them; just not enough so to complete them.