Amid rising electric bills, states are under pressure to insulate regular household and business ratepayers from the costs of feeding Big Tech’s energy-hungry data centers.
Honestly, if this is what it takes to bring nuclear power back into usage, I’m kinda ok with it. Per kWh, nuclear is one of the least dangerous generation methods [and by far the safest base load generation method] and puts out less radiation into the environment than things like coal. Even the ‘disaster’ at 3 Mile Island, the worst in US history, wasn’t that damaging or deadly to anything more than the PR for the nuclear industry. Plus, technology has come a long way in 46 years, so it’s going to be safer than it was previously.
I agree with all your points, except the last bit, because corporations in this country have not shown any enthusiasm for embracing or improving any technology that does not directly increase profit. Particularly these AI companies. I am confident they will cut every corner they possibly can and things will end up being less safe than they were before.
Yes, the energy companies are running the plants, but if they have a single customer for the plant they will bend over backwards to meet their deadlines.
And where do you think is the nuclear fuel supply coming from? For the existing reactors but even more so for the newly planned plants? The answer is Rosatom. So why should it be a good idea to become more dependent on a cleptocratic regime that’s threatening and openly attacking democracies?
And where do you think is the nuclear fuel supply coming from? For the existing reactors but even more so for the newly planned plants?
Probably from Canada, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan or Australia, which accounts for close to 3/4 of current sources. Or possibly one of the other 6 countries that make up the rest of the non-russian uranium, since Russia only accounts for 12% of foreign sourced uranium as of 2022.
Try googling basic facts before spreading easily debunkable FUD.
Honestly, if this is what it takes to bring nuclear power back into usage, I’m kinda ok with it. Per kWh, nuclear is one of the least dangerous generation methods [and by far the safest base load generation method] and puts out less radiation into the environment than things like coal. Even the ‘disaster’ at 3 Mile Island, the worst in US history, wasn’t that damaging or deadly to anything more than the PR for the nuclear industry. Plus, technology has come a long way in 46 years, so it’s going to be safer than it was previously.
I agree with all your points, except the last bit, because corporations in this country have not shown any enthusiasm for embracing or improving any technology that does not directly increase profit. Particularly these AI companies. I am confident they will cut every corner they possibly can and things will end up being less safe than they were before.
Yes, the energy companies are running the plants, but if they have a single customer for the plant they will bend over backwards to meet their deadlines.
And where do you think is the nuclear fuel supply coming from? For the existing reactors but even more so for the newly planned plants? The answer is Rosatom. So why should it be a good idea to become more dependent on a cleptocratic regime that’s threatening and openly attacking democracies?
Probably from Canada, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan or Australia, which accounts for close to 3/4 of current sources. Or possibly one of the other 6 countries that make up the rest of the non-russian uranium, since Russia only accounts for 12% of foreign sourced uranium as of 2022.
Try googling basic facts before spreading easily debunkable FUD.