this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
124 points (91.9% liked)
Technology
57997 readers
5415 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Alls I know is, putting nuclear technology in the hands of a techbro can only work out great for everyone.
When they layoff everyone and leave the place poisoned for millennia, the share price is gonna jump!
This is why the government requires you to have long term finances that can be used to prevent a disaster long term due to financial issues.
I think you make a good case for making energy production a public utility. Private ownership of essential services is ethically bankrupt. The fact that a company can fail and leave people without core services, is disgusting in my opinion. Even more disgusting is that they almost always seek public funds to bail them out.
You misunderstood. The government requires that the company invest plenty of extra money into funding in case the company fails. I think this is a bond but I don't remember.
For instance, the TMI (three mile island) decommission started in 2019 and will be finished by 2079. There has been multiple changes in ownership but the current company is using the leftover cleanup funds to slowly decommission the site.
Wow what a success story. I'll trust that everything works out great by 2079.
So the current company didn't have plenty of extra funds in funding? It's just taking a cut of the "leftover" cleanup funds? Sounds extremely effective and responsible.
\s
There are regulations in place, and nuclear power plants do not leave toxic waste around them? They aren't like coal plants that simply dump the waste into the air.
Unfortunately made and destroyed by policitians you can legally buy in the USA... They are cheap too, $10k gets you tons of access, for $100k you can make them dance like monkeys
Got any sources for that happening in that domain? I doubt there are many politicians of the old guard that are comfortable relaxing nuclear power regulations.
https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/nuclear-industry-politics-bribes-corruption-and-lies
I respect your attempt to narrow it down enough to maybe escape my generalization... The lesson is never put your trust in politicians
I appreciate the link, it's hard to trust what people say nowadays as their hate for societal structures makes them all regurgitate the same sentences without regard for context or nuance.
Your source however didn't touch on regulations being breached or removed by corrupt politicians. They only spoke about attempts of siphoning money from the public.
You are right, this corruption case was not about regulations but, imo, that's just a matter or price and time.
A long time ago I read about some horrible explosion in a sugar refinery and was amazed how so many industries have had lethal cases like that which can be traced directly to greed (not negligence, not an accident, not a bad mix of circumstances, just greed)
Since then I have all but convinced myself that every industry out there have had a similar example (usually more than one) which is why I have zero tolerance for the notion that industry can regulate itself. Every single time a politician talks about deregulation for efficiency or job creation, what they really mean is they are taking "donations" and couldn't care less that people get hurt
I do believe nuclear power will always stay a unique exception to this, it's extremely tightly regulated on an international level due to the fear of nuclear bombs. It's far safer and better for the environment than coal plants or natural gas, which do poison the environment without much corruption needed to enable it.
The nuclear power industry is a whole different beast than what the California tech bros are used to.
I believe in nuclear and hope you are right ...
We already have had real close calls on nuclear (Chernobyl for example).... Have we learned from our mistakes? I hope so
Wasn't there a flood of poisenous chemical sludge in US, a few years ago?