3 ms·
A lot of this is not inherent to building nuclear reactors. We've regulated nuclear power to the point where it's cost prohibitive. If we required every solar p
by JamesBarney 3y ago
A lot of this is not inherent to building nuclear reactors. We've regulated nuclear power to the point where it's cost prohibitive. If we required every solar panel installer to have a phd, and only let them work 1 hr per day solar would be incredibly expensive too.
Imagine we were willing to accept the same death rate as natural gas. Reducing regulations to the point of having 100x more nuclear incidents. How much cheaper would they be to build?
- Panzer04 3y agoThe problem with nuclear accidents is the consequences can be so catosrophic that it's virtually impossible to accept failure. Irradiate a few hundred sqkm in an accident and you easily exceed every other expense of building the plant (being generous). It's funny how usually people argue for more regulation of side effects, but as soon as nuclear gets involved it's the reverse. Nuclear must be absolutely safe, because no one but the government (and by extension, the general populace) can afford the expense of insuring it. Reducing regulation is tantamount to giving investors permission to pull as much money as they like out of the plant and leaving us with the risk.
- ryandrake 3y agoWe also know that corporations are going to be corporations. The business guys will eventually take the wheel and absent sufficient regulation they will inevitably cost-cut and corner-cut their way to disaster. It’s totally predictable. If there is ever even a remote profit motive, everything, including safety, will eventually be thrown under the bus to maximize profit. It’s how all businesses are run.