• Arcturus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Poor track record with safety (not talking about the big issues such as meltdowns, but smaller issues such as minor leaks, and workplace incidents). Nobody’s interested in building them unless they’ve got profit guarantees and subsidies from the government. Nobody’s interested in insuring them in full (unless it’s the government). Nobody’s interested in the eventual decommissioning process, which can take a century, and again, still costs. Renewables will be up and running, and profitable, long before nuclear is constructed.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you see the environment as just another way to profit, and you assume that we can’t save the environment because it costs too much, you are just another shitty fossil fuel executive, but worse because at least the fossil fuel executives get paid for their short-term ideas, you are just supporting them and thereby standing by as hundreds of millions of people are condemned to death, hopefully including yourself, for literally nothing.

      • Arcturus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        So, you’re going to spend, billions, to build a nuclear powerplant, that will decarbonise at a slower rate, never turn a profit, be an economic sinkhole megaproject, or, you could just build a solar panel or wind turbine in like, a year, where it’ll be functional and working. Profits allow you to reinvest into more projects. Losses, mean you’re putting endless amounts of money into less.

        • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Again if you are worried about “turning a profit” you don’t give a fuck about the environment and need to leave.