←back to thread

1041 points mpweiher | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
reenorap ◴[] No.45225348[source]
We need to drive down the costs of implementing nuclear energy. Most of it are fake costs due to regulation. I understand that regulation is needed but we also need nuclear energy, we have to find a streamlined way to get more plants up and running as soon as possible. I think they should all be government projects so that private companies can't complain that they're losing money and keep have to ratchet up the prices, like PG&E in California. My rates have doubled in a few years to over $0.40/kWh and up over $0.50/kWh after I go up a tier depending on usage.
replies(39): >>45225431 #>>45225480 #>>45225524 #>>45225535 #>>45225565 #>>45225613 #>>45225619 #>>45225755 #>>45225860 #>>45225949 #>>45225961 #>>45226031 #>>45226055 #>>45226067 #>>45226154 #>>45226181 #>>45226458 #>>45226594 #>>45226646 #>>45226658 #>>45226803 #>>45226943 #>>45226958 #>>45227052 #>>45227098 #>>45227206 #>>45227241 #>>45227262 #>>45227391 #>>45227592 #>>45227750 #>>45228008 #>>45228029 #>>45228207 #>>45228266 #>>45228536 #>>45229440 #>>45229710 #>>45229877 #
boringg ◴[] No.45225961[source]
This should be a quick reminder to the crowd -- Nuclear is almost always a public/private partnership to manage the project development costs and to keep the cost of capital in a reasonable range. The costs are large for a private company to put up the capital with the risk involved.
replies(1): >>45226282 #
pfdietz ◴[] No.45226282[source]
In other words: nuclear is not viable unless the risks are offloaded to the public. Privatize profits, socialize risks.
replies(2): >>45226383 #>>45227752 #
ezst ◴[] No.45227752[source]
Or, you know, socialize risks, socialise profits. I don't know why we would have to put up with this abuse and corruption any longer.
replies(1): >>45229434 #
1. pfdietz ◴[] No.45229434[source]
It's precious that you think a socialized system wouldn't be rife with corruption.
replies(1): >>45233365 #
2. ezst ◴[] No.45233365[source]
You only really have two options there:

- a system of lords and peasants, where the lords are held accountable and kept in check by the peasants, as the social contract obliges, or - a system of lords and peasants, with no checks and balances

Obviously, corruption can creep in any system, but the one that states "let's give it all to the lords with nothing in return" seems asinine to me.