3 ms·
There is room between under-regulation and over-regulation. Given that we are experiencing high costs and other barriers to construction, we can do at least tw
by ericmay 11mo ago
There is room between under-regulation and over-regulation.
Given that we are experiencing high costs and other barriers to construction, we can do at least two things: reduce red tape where it makes sense or where the risk is acceptable to help lower costs, or the US government can, through a variety of mechanisms ranging from basic research funding to direct subsidies, spend taxpayer money to try and alleviate costs.
Given that we supposedly (and I agree) need to build nuclear reactors to help power our country and given that we aren’t building them, we can optionally use both levers to encourage construction. There seems to be this mind virus that has infected many people on the internet that seem to think that regulations are a moral good, and so having more of them must be more good.
This is not accurate.
Regulations are simply a tool we can wield to achieve desired outcomes within various risk and need-based calculations. More regulations can be good, for example we should ban highway billboards- that would be a good regulation. Or we can eliminate regulations - allow businesses to build more housing using pre-approved designs that meet existing zoning code. Neither is good or bad, except in that it helps to achieve some aim that society has.
The regulation or lack there of, of nuclear energy in the United States has absolutely nothing to do with Boeing airlines screwing up some plane designs. Drawing a conclusion that nuclear energy must be regulated (it is) or over-regulated (it probably is or else we would build more), because of a belief that Boeing airliners weren’t regulated enough is, to put it lightly, nonsense, and you are mistakenly using the application of some regulation or lack of causing some bad things to happen, to imply that more regulation in another area would mean good things happen through this framework of regulation == good.
And further, if you’re going to suggest that Boeing is effectively unregulated, which is untrue in practice and in principal, then I’d argue that was for the best given that it is a hugely successful company that employs tens of thousands of people and hundreds of millions have flown and continue to fly on their airlines every single day safely and without incident.
- Forgeties79 11mo agoWith something as serious as a nuclear reactor, I am OK with over regulation.
- dzhiurgis 11mo agoBut why not same scrutiny for coal?
- ben_w 11mo agoCorrect operation of a coal plant has global impact, and therefore coal should be phased out entirely. Absent that, when a coal plant goes badly wrong, the damage is small enough and localised enough to be affordable. When a nuclear plant goes wrong, the upper bound for error includes both Chrenobyl and also "unknown parties stole the radioisotopes" followed by terrorists repeating the Goiânia accident somewhere. Making all the failure modes not happen is expensive.
- dzhiurgis 11mo agoBut one is enforced (nuclear security) and coal is not. p.s. ICE cars are literally spewing cancer fumes right into kids faces. 0 fucks given. If anything people try to frame EVs as actual devil.
- nandomrumber 11mo agoExcept that modern car engines are vastly improved over their 1970’s carburettor fed, catalytic convertered, counterparts.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- dzhiurgis 11mo agoGo and run your car in garage lol. I swear HN is infested with bots now.
- TheSpiceIsLife 11mo agoThat’s going to kill me because the exhaust is dominated by carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. It isn’t going to kill me via the route you suggest: by giving kids cancer. It’s Christmas very shortly, try not to be this much of a cunt around you’re family.
- ImPostingOnHN 11mo ago> There seems to be this mind virus that has infected many people on the internet that seem to think that regulations are a moral good The people who don't agree with you are largely reasonable, as you likely are, and are no more infectees of a "mind virus" for holding their opinions than you are for holding yours. There's no need to denigrate them, or misrepresent their views to try to make your point. Indeed, many of them arrived at their opinion after seeing what happens when people push for not-enough regulation: Once bitten, twice shy.