this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
612 points (90.9% liked)

World News

38788 readers
3103 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No, it would just bankrupt the state. Just because something is state owned, doesn't mean the cost vanishes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Infrastructure in this country is already so heavily subsidized by the federal government (and state, if you live somewhere that actually cares about your well-being) that we're already pretty much paying for it all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Profits are what is earned after expenses. It wouldn't bankrupt a state to run energy infrastructure at cost.

[–] BedbugCutlefish 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are, of course, correct.

But even so, costs are costs. It doesn't matter if you've achieved communism, and are in a moneyless, stateless existance, you need labor and materials to build nuclear, and labor and materials to maintain it (along with other infrastructure).

And, I'm not anti-nuclear; it does make sense to use sometimes, in some amounts. Its just very very costly for what it provides.

But frankly, even only accounting for current tech, wide spread nuclear just doesn't make that much sense compared to renewables + storage and large grids interconnects.