In a major setback last week, the first serious effort to build small reactors in the United States was abruptly canceled amid soaring costs. While other projects are still moving forward, the industry has consistently struggled to build plants on time and on budget.

  • lntl@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s strange that we have money to subsidize aviation fuel, motor vehicle production/use, natural gas extraction, funding wars in foreign land, etc

    but we don’t have money for this

    it’s just strange

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is producing electricity just like solar and wind turbines. Both of which are profitable today. So it would be smarter to use government money for some green projects without a viable cheaper alternative. That is also happening on a fairly large scale.

      • lntl@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think you missed the point, why’s cheaper even a thing?

        • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The green transition is the biggest transformation of the worlds energy system in human history. We have to replace huge parts of the electricity system, transportation, materials with stuff like plastics, heating of our homes and change the food system across the world.

          Obviously parts of that stand, but emissions are still going up, so we are clearly not doing enough. So we need to put more resources into it and we have to do it in a smarter way. We are nearly at a collapse situation, so especially rich countries have to think about shrinking the economy to not emit as much anymore. Wasting time and resources is just not a thing we have the luxury of today.

          • lntl@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            there’s this idea that we have to be frugal and fiscally conservative when addressing the climate. when it comes to subsidizing war, fossil fuels, and motor vehicle use a different argument applies.

            that’s the point.

            we don’t need to be fiscally conservative with respect to the atmosphere. it’s too important