3 ms·

A “subsidy” that has never been paid. You’d be hard pressed to find a reactor with its backup power in the basement in the US, and especially not on the coast.

by ch4s3 4y ago

pydry 4y ago
>A “subsidy” that has never been paid. Free insurance is a subsidy. Pretending that it isnt is dishonest. Japan paid $0 in 2010 and by 2012 an $800 billion bill came due. Recent nuclear legislation has focused on extending the legal life of aging plants. Nuclear power is getting more dangerous in America not safer. It ought to be a moot point anyway given the extreme cost of nuclear power without the subsidy.
- ch4s3 4y ago
  Japan’s accident was entirely preventable and a similar scenario couldn’t happen at any facility in the US. Needing to build an ice wall to contain radioactive water pumped in from the ocean was a huge portion of the cost and truly unique.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    This will be equally true of the next trillion dollar accident and the one after. Circumstances that defeat defense in depth are necessarily unique and convoluted. My guess is the next one will involve at least one set of forged documents about components and some manager pushing past a boundary to meet ever tightening cost targets.
    - ch4s3 4y ago
      There is no precedent for this. The NRC is constantly monitoring plants in the US and operating staff are regularly rotated geographically to prevent them from becoming complacent. There are so many layers of protection around nuclear power in the US that it would take many pages to describe. That you think it would be possible to forge documents under managerial pressure shows that you Don know the first thing about nuclear power in the US.
      - Schroedingersat 4y ago
        There are nuclear reactors in other places where it has happened https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_Korea_forgery_scandal-1010137.html https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_... Probably not a coincidence that it happened in the place with the lowest (unaudited) costs. The US nuclear program is first class when it comes to accountability, reliability, and safety but this is also the reason that it costs upwards of $12/W excluding the publicly funded portions of the NRC's budget (which is one of the moredirect places the trillion dollar free insurance manifests) and various other subsidies. You either get the safety or you get rid of the red tape driving up costs.
        ch4s3 4y ago
        I'm only talking about the US, but I would argue that the NRC is overkill in some key areas.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago
        > but I would argue that the NRC is overkill in some key areas. And the thousands of people constantly shouting to get rid of all the red tape are why I think the next INES 7 incident will involve forgery.
        ch4s3 4y ago
        No one is “shouting get rid of all the red tape” with respect to nuclear power in the US. There are safety experts urging a more scientific approach.

A “subsidy” that has never been paid. You’d be hard pressed to find a reactor with its backup power in the basement in the US, and especially not on the coast.

by ch4s3 4y ago

A “subsidy” that has never been paid. You’d be hard pressed to find a reactor with its backup power in the basement in the US, and especially not on the coast.

pydry 4y ago

>A “subsidy” that has never been paid. Free insurance is a subsidy. Pretending that it isnt is dishonest. Japan paid $0 in 2010 and by 2012 an $800 billion bill came due. Recent nuclear legislation has focused on extending the legal life of aging plants. Nuclear power is getting more dangerous in America not safer. It ought to be a moot point anyway given the extreme cost of nuclear power without the subsidy.

ch4s3 4y ago
Japan’s accident was entirely preventable and a similar scenario couldn’t happen at any facility in the US. Needing to build an ice wall to contain radioactive water pumped in from the ocean was a huge portion of the cost and truly unique.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  This will be equally true of the next trillion dollar accident and the one after. Circumstances that defeat defense in depth are necessarily unique and convoluted. My guess is the next one will involve at least one set of forged documents about components and some manager pushing past a boundary to meet ever tightening cost targets.
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    There is no precedent for this. The NRC is constantly monitoring plants in the US and operating staff are regularly rotated geographically to prevent them from becoming complacent. There are so many layers of protection around nuclear power in the US that it would take many pages to describe. That you think it would be possible to forge documents under managerial pressure shows that you Don know the first thing about nuclear power in the US.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      There are nuclear reactors in other places where it has happened https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_Korea_forgery_scandal-1010137.html https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Indictments_for_South_... Probably not a coincidence that it happened in the place with the lowest (unaudited) costs. The US nuclear program is first class when it comes to accountability, reliability, and safety but this is also the reason that it costs upwards of $12/W excluding the publicly funded portions of the NRC's budget (which is one of the moredirect places the trillion dollar free insurance manifests) and various other subsidies. You either get the safety or you get rid of the red tape driving up costs.
      - ch4s3 4y ago
        I'm only talking about the US, but I would argue that the NRC is overkill in some key areas.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago
        > but I would argue that the NRC is overkill in some key areas. And the thousands of people constantly shouting to get rid of all the red tape are why I think the next INES 7 incident will involve forgery.
        ch4s3 4y ago
        No one is “shouting get rid of all the red tape” with respect to nuclear power in the US. There are safety experts urging a more scientific approach.