3 ms·
Right, but one interpreation of this fact is that they set the bar for compliance too high, so it's almost impossible to finish a reactor in a financially feasi
by ellyagg 5y ago
Right, but one interpreation of this fact is that they set the bar for compliance too high, so it's almost impossible to finish a reactor in a financially feasible way.
Unfortunately, there seems to be no way for our society to overcome the apparent moral high ground that nuclear skpetics hold. Nuclear disastors are too good at capturing the imagination and all a skeptic has to say is "you can never be too safe."
Meanwhile, we claim that our reliance on fossil fuels is a disastor, but if it's not enough of a disastor to compel us to make nuclear regulatorily viable, how much of a disaster can it really be?
- dieortin 5y agoIt not being financially feasible to finish a reactor and comply with the regulations doesn’t mean they’re set too high. Maybe it just means you can’t have safe AND financially feasible nuclear right now.
- stjohnswarts 5y agoIt actually does since other countries are actually building nuclear plants. I bet if you traced through the NRC membership you would find government malaise and industry connections stopping new reactor designs from making their way through.