4 ms·

Former nuclear reactor operator here. It's time for this 1970s style fear mongering to stop so we can get the planet fixed. Dr. Jaczko is one of the worst NRC

Former nuclear reactor operator here. It's time for this 1970s style fear mongering to stop so we can get the planet fixed. Dr. Jaczko is one of the worst NRC commissioners in history and was appointed by an anti-nuclear president to be obstructionist. Every one of the arguments in the letter are valid only because of regulations that have been put in place to make nuclear reactors impossible to build quickly or on budget.

epistasis 5y ago
The fear mongering isn't the problem with nuclear these days. The problem is that the US can't build it. VC Summer was a scam, billing rate payers of something like $9B for an abandoned construction site, and jail time for executives. Vogtle is little better, and by the time it's finished, it will be some of the most expensive energy on the grid, and spending that money on solar and storage would have had a much much bigger climate impact. Utilities know the financial risk of attempting nuclear construction, and the only reason these two sites attempted new nuclear is because laws were passed to pass all financial risk on to the public when there are construction failures. The public deserves better. Though this editorial may be annoying, it's a complete distraction from the true cause of nuclear's failure in the 21st century, and that cause is entirely the nuclear industry's own fault.
- indymike 5y ago
  > The problem is that the US can't build it. With the current regulatory situation that is accurate.
  - epistasis 5y ago
    The regulatory system had nothing to do with the recent failures. Seriously, it was just incompetence. See also other large builds in the US which do not have the nrc.
    - indymike 5y ago
      I do believe it is not possible to build a reactor in the US without NRC approval and abiding by NRC regulation. Source: the NRC website.
      - epistasis 5y ago
        I'm talking about the general failure of all large construction projects, not just highly regulated ones like nuclear builds. The US economy no longer has the productive capacity to do large-scale logistical coordination needed for building big things. Until this is fixed, nuclear will be a pipe dream. And by the time it is fixed, it may well be the case that all steam-driven electricity generation has been made obsolete, in terms of cost, by solar wind and storage. Maybe not, but in any case that's more than a decade away.
        indymike 5y ago
        As builds go, a power plant isn't really all that big. Even nuclear ones.
        epistasis 5y ago
        $5-$15B isn't big in your opinion?! What sort of construction project is bigger? Miles of high precision welding, massive concrete pours that don't really happen in the same way anywhere else... Have you followed any nuclear construction? Which projects? What project do you consider to be bigger? Nuclear is insanely complex and large and difficult, I can't imagine what your basis for comparison could be here.
        indymike 5y ago
        Submarines (lol, nuclear reactor + weapons systems all in a hull that can withstand insane pressure and protect and support 100 people), aircraft carriers (airport + nuclear reactor, support 5,000 people, weapons systems, air traffic control), electric car plants, large industrial parks (like the 30M SF one they built in 1 year in my hometown). The only thing holding nuclear back is a tether made of paper. I used to operate a reactor and I now make software. The internals of your average video game or relational database are orders of magnitude more complex than a reactor. A reactor is a big machine, and the process involved is somewhat novel, but ultimately, it's making steam to turn a turbine with heat from decaying metal. It's not magic or even all that high-tech. Honestly, this stuff has been around for close to 80 years now. That means we can construct them using tech my great granddad would have been very familiar with.

epistasis 5y ago

The fear mongering isn't the problem with nuclear these days. The problem is that the US can't build it. VC Summer was a scam, billing rate payers of something like $9B for an abandoned construction site, and jail time for executives. Vogtle is little better, and by the time it's finished, it will be some of the most expensive energy on the grid, and spending that money on solar and storage would have had a much much bigger climate impact. Utilities know the financial risk of attempting nuclear construction, and the only reason these two sites attempted new nuclear is because laws were passed to pass all financial risk on to the public when there are construction failures. The public deserves better. Though this editorial may be annoying, it's a complete distraction from the true cause of nuclear's failure in the 21st century, and that cause is entirely the nuclear industry's own fault.

indymike 5y ago
> The problem is that the US can't build it. With the current regulatory situation that is accurate.
- epistasis 5y ago
  The regulatory system had nothing to do with the recent failures. Seriously, it was just incompetence. See also other large builds in the US which do not have the nrc.
  - indymike 5y ago
    I do believe it is not possible to build a reactor in the US without NRC approval and abiding by NRC regulation. Source: the NRC website.
    - epistasis 5y ago
      I'm talking about the general failure of all large construction projects, not just highly regulated ones like nuclear builds. The US economy no longer has the productive capacity to do large-scale logistical coordination needed for building big things. Until this is fixed, nuclear will be a pipe dream. And by the time it is fixed, it may well be the case that all steam-driven electricity generation has been made obsolete, in terms of cost, by solar wind and storage. Maybe not, but in any case that's more than a decade away.
      - indymike 5y ago
        As builds go, a power plant isn't really all that big. Even nuclear ones.
        epistasis 5y ago
        $5-$15B isn't big in your opinion?! What sort of construction project is bigger? Miles of high precision welding, massive concrete pours that don't really happen in the same way anywhere else... Have you followed any nuclear construction? Which projects? What project do you consider to be bigger? Nuclear is insanely complex and large and difficult, I can't imagine what your basis for comparison could be here.
        indymike 5y ago
        Submarines (lol, nuclear reactor + weapons systems all in a hull that can withstand insane pressure and protect and support 100 people), aircraft carriers (airport + nuclear reactor, support 5,000 people, weapons systems, air traffic control), electric car plants, large industrial parks (like the 30M SF one they built in 1 year in my hometown). The only thing holding nuclear back is a tether made of paper. I used to operate a reactor and I now make software. The internals of your average video game or relational database are orders of magnitude more complex than a reactor. A reactor is a big machine, and the process involved is somewhat novel, but ultimately, it's making steam to turn a turbine with heat from decaying metal. It's not magic or even all that high-tech. Honestly, this stuff has been around for close to 80 years now. That means we can construct them using tech my great granddad would have been very familiar with.