• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -37 days ago

    100% of nuclear funding is political bribery. It is unbankable and uninsurable. Through bribery, cost+ funding can be obtained. More bribes = more covering of cost and time overruns.

    If what you mean by “political resistance” is that bigger bribes are needed to overcome unpopularity, that is a tiny fraction of the bribery amount. Elected officials do blatantly destructive and unpopular acts all the time. The rate of approvals has little to do with project costs once approved.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        37 days ago

        Ohio corruption scandal was over nuclear industry bribes. All nuclear projects are publicly funded, and because they are categorically uneconomical, and delay any impact on global warming for 15 years, they are lobbied for by fossil fuel competitors. Boondoggles based on disinformation necessarily require political body to be corrupt and in on it, rather than just stupid.

        • @passiveaggressivesonar
          link
          17 days ago

          That’s pretty bad and undeniable. Does this account for all nuclear funding though?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            16 days ago

            Having no economic value does mean only corruption pretends nuclear energy to have economic value. Another dishonest, but bribed by defense instead of utility operator, motive is weapons.

            There is an honest exception of a small town in Arizona (lack of water). They admit their power project costs are astronomical for nuclear compared to solar alternative, but the permanent jobs provided by a nuclear plant raise property values and taxes a bit. This too, no matter how honest the motives, is corruption in obtaining other people’s money to finance a project for local jobs and property values.