Countries with the most nuclear reactors

Another report out today, latest delay at Vogtle to cost ratepayers another $1B for the latest 4 month delay. This was a project that was supposed to cost $14B when approved by regulators, now coming in at $27.8B. Oh, and they received a $6.5B loan guarantee from the Department of Energy, so look who else is getting federal subsidies. How is this good fiscal policy again?

New Delay for Georgia Nuclear Reactors as Costs Mount
 
DT-waw said:
Soon electricity will be generated out of Biden Kamala Harris and ocasio cortez brainpower. Oh, and also greta thunberg! Yesss! These people have so much energy, they will power the world.
And the planet will be saved again. But. For how long? When trump will come back, it will be nightmare again. So be good lil slaves.

The planet is fine. The people are f....d
More...

Women hater?
Your mother didn't love you much?
 
It's pathetic that some people are actively against "liberals" and "environmentalists", like if those were evil concepts.
Then those same people are happy paying taxes and supporting countries waging useless wars around the world for a piece of the energy pie. Idiotic at an unimaginable level.

Luckily the new generations, the future, do not think like those dinosaurs on the way to extinction.
 
Sig said:
...Which is why I'm baffled that you seem to always react so reflexively and in a manner that is so at odds with all you other comments when this subject comes up. I'm not sure even you are aware of this off dichotomy...
More...

I suppose I should consider myself lucky that of all the subjects I comment upon, this is the only one that throws you for a loop.

I think the reason I am so dinosaur on this issue is a combination of factors which make me very frustrated.

1. There are many people around here who are so vocal against fossil fuels, but refuse to allow green projects to be approved FOR THE STUPIDEST OF REASONS. Bird death (such as the sacred Spotted-Owl), noise, and polluting their viewing of the ocean. The opposition of converting land use to solar panels, because, flora? (And to be honest, I think an offshore windfarm would be quite a thing to behold. Much cooler-looking than the standard flat boring ocean we have seen all our lives.) Can't have ocean-wave generators because it will kill turtles and fish. But what did they have for dinner? Cod!

2. The idea that green energy can replace fossil fuels in it's entirety. This is physically impossible. We consume too much energy as a nation, and as a world. Green energy has to be viewed as a supplement to fossil fuels, not a replacement for them...

I cannot articulate the other reasons as this point, because my mind goes into a flurry and gets me riled up to the point I must drop the line of thought. Dare I say, it makes me angry. It's not the ideas themselves that get me angry...It's how the people around me in the community think regarding the ideas that gets me angry. So I am angry at those people. The hypocrites who claim they hate oil and want to see it go away, but wear makeup and buy disposable plastic bottles, and proceed to toss them in the trash rather than recycle them.

Shit like that.
 
Overnight said:
I suppose I should consider myself lucky that of all the subjects I comment upon, this is the only one that throws you for a loop.

I think the reason I am so dinosaur on this issue is a combination of factors which make me very frustrated.

1. There are many people around here who are so vocal against fossil fuels, but refuse to allow green projects to be approved FOR THE STUPIDEST OF REASONS. Bird death (such as the sacred Spotted-Owl), noise, and polluting their viewing of the ocean. The opposition of converting land use to solar panels, because, flora? (And to be honest, I think an offshore windfarm would be quite a thing to behold. Much cooler-looking than the standard flat boring ocean we have seen all our lives.) Can't have ocean-wave generators because it will kill turtles and fish. But what did they have for dinner? Cod!

2. The idea that green energy can replace fossil fuels in it's entirety. This is physically impossible. We consume too much energy as a nation, and as a world. Green energy has to be viewed as a supplement to fossil fuels, not a replacement for them...

I cannot articulate the other reasons as this point, because my mind goes into a flurry and gets me riled up to the point I must drop the line of thought. Dare I say, it makes me angry. It's not the ideas themselves that get me angry...It's how the people around me in the community think regarding the ideas that gets me angry. So I am angry at those people. The hypocrites who claim they hate oil and want to see it go away, but wear makeup and buy disposable plastic bottles, and proceed to toss them in the trash rather than recycle them.

Shit like that.
More...
Fair enough. I can appreciate that those types make you angry, me too! At some point I hope you separate that from the technology and people implementing it, who I think you'll find are far more practical and pragmatic. I think you'd find it interesting at the very least.
 
Sig said:
Fair enough. I can appreciate that those types make you angry, me too! At some point I hope you separate that from the technology and people implementing it, who I think you'll find are far more practical and pragmatic. I think you'd find it interesting at the very least.
More...

Mr. Fusion™ Home Energy Reactor, man. We NEED that! Ugggg!
 
Overnight said:
Mr. Fusion™ Home Energy Reactor, man. We NEED that! Ugggg!
More...
There's a significant portion of the population we can't trust not to put metal objects in their microwave just to see what happens. Do we really want to give them access to that:D
 
Sig said:
There's a significant portion of the population we can't trust not to put metal objects in their microwave just to see what happens. Do we really want to give them access to that:D
More...

Mr. Fusion is not the same thing. Oh, you fucking bait master. Welp, here you go...


I do not like you, and everyone else at this point, y'all know me too well.
 
Rolls-Royce secures £450m for mini nuclear reactors venture

The engineering firm will set up a venture focused on developing small modular nuclear reactors, or SMRs, in partnership with investors BNF Resources and the US generator Exelon Generation with a joint investment of £195m to fund the plans over the next three years.

The government will match the consortium’s investment, which is set to receive a second phase top-up of £50m from Rolls-Royce, with £210m to help roll out the mini nuclear reactors as part of the government’s green 10 point plan to kickstart the green economy over the next decade.

Ministers hope that the new generation of SMRs will quicker and cheaper to roll out than traditional large-scale nuclear reactors – such as the 3,200 megawatt Hinkley Point C project – which face enormous construction risks, and are prone to spiralling costs and delays.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top