• @gmtom
    link
    English
    11 year ago

    no? i really dont get where you pulled that from. My issue (among others) is that nuclear takes decades to build, so if we invest in nuclear we’re looking at 10 years at least before we see any kind of return on that investment. and so in the meantime we have to continue using fossil fuels, which is what the fossil fuel companoes want.

    • @utopianfiat
      link
      English
      11 year ago

      The only reason it takes longer than a few years is because of arbitrary regulatory barriers we’ve placed - so when we say “we should build more nuclear” part of the manifestation of that will be streamlining regulation to make it faster and cheaper.

      Alternatively, we make coal, oil, and natural gas subject to the same externality-internalizing regulations and taxes and see how things shake out.

      • @gmtom
        link
        English
        11 year ago

        Weird that every country in the world others than China put up these same arbitrary regulatory barriers at around the same time. Can you describe what these barriers are and why they are unnecessary?

        • @utopianfiat
          link
          English
          11 year ago

          One is that nuclear power has to account for and financially compensate its passive radiation emissions. This is unique to nuclear power, even though passive emissions from nuclear plants are less than 10 times lower than radiation emissions from coal power plants. Clearly we don’t care that much about the harmful effects of the radiation emissions, and if we do then coal should be charged for the current and past emissions.

          • @gmtom
            link
            English
            11 year ago

            Can you send me a link? Because I’m looking for this regulation and can’t find it? Or at least tell me which country?