this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024

219 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

59495 readers

3041 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

219

Restart of Three Mile Island tests US appetite for nuclear revival (www.ft.com)

submitted 4 days ago by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://archive.is/Pv8vJ

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yes, cost is going up because people expect mega corps to pay for their infrastructure investment lol

So you think that companies don't pay for electricity? That they're not part of the "profits" the electrical company has on the books?

Man... I wish I could just get free electricity for my company. Oh... and I pay higher rates at my commercial space for less usage than I do residentially.

But right! That's companies somehow getting some freebie from "the people".

Oh, and you continue to ignore my point as well, so I'll ask it again... If there are more nuclear plants... thus more production for things used to create and maintain nuclear plants. Will the cost to produce MORE nuclear energy go down?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Microsoft is demanding US taxpayer provide loans to bring this plant online. It has been sitting there for 50 years...

They pay lower rate than the people who pay for the planet.

What sort of clown capitalist regime is this? And why are taxpayers so receptive to such arrangement.

If this is such a good deal, why does not microsoft just pay for its own capital expenditure?

This is just basic capitalism. You keep pointing out to some big picture benefits like a lobby clown in DC asking for money but look US grid capacity will increase and "we" will create jobs 🤡

I am not against nuclear, or infrastructure. I never made that claim. I am against taxpayer paying for some dude's pet project...

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Microsoft is demanding US taxpayer provide loans to bring this plant online. It has been sitting there for 50 years…

... You understand so little.

Here you go.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/09/26/1104516/three-mile-island-microsoft/

In March, the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan got a loan guarantee from the US Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office to the tune of over $1.5 billion to help restart.

https://www.constellationenergy.com/newsroom/2024/Constellation-to-Launch-Crane-Clean-Energy-Center-Restoring-Jobs-and-Carbon-Free-Power-to-The-Grid.html

Constellation signs its largest-ever power purchase agreement with Microsoft, a deal that will restore TMI Unit 1 to service and keep it online for decades; add approximately 835 megawatts of carbon-free energy to the grid; create 3,400 direct and indirect jobs and deliver more than $3 billion in state and federal taxes

Nowhere is it Microsoft demanding anything. It's the owners of the power plant itself that got the LOAN (loans get repayed btw... in case you've forgotten what the word means). And it's easily identified that the workforce increase in skilled labor means more taxpayers paying more money to taxes. And look at that! the added state and federal revenue will 2x the loan amount YEARLY.

So can you answer the fucking question now?

Oh, and you continue to ignore my point as well, so I’ll ask it again… If there are more nuclear plants… thus more production for things used to create and maintain nuclear plants. Will the cost to produce MORE nuclear energy go down?

Edit: to drill the point home though... let's say government bad, lets spend little as possible (which I'm generally whole-heartedly for)... 1.5 billion to make 3,400 high paying jobs for 30+ years... That's a fucking no brainer spend. You should WANT this spending. There's lots of shit to complain about with the government. Providing a loan that will be paid back that will make THOUSANDS of highly skilled jobs... This ain't it chief.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org -2 points 3 days ago

So if project fails, taxpayer pays? thank you, daddy

Nice set up ;)

Do you think feds would have provided this loan guarantee if microshit did not lobby?

Clown capitalism at work.

Oh, and you continue to ignore my point as well, so I’ll ask it again… If there are more nuclear plants… thus more production for things used to create and maintain nuclear plants. Will the cost to produce MORE nuclear energy go down?

I trust you bro... i expect further hand outs to be demanded from taxpayer as this project progress.

Something about that nuclear plant in GA, at least that was an earnest try.

again i have zero problem with this refurbishment. my issue is taxpayer subsidy of corpo's capex.

If project so good, why can't they fund it themselves. Why are we socializing this risk for Microshi data centers?

Just feds should just build and operate nuclear plants themselves, they fucking pay for all of it anyway.

But nahh, we pay for them, then they price gouging households with high rates while providing subsidies for industrial use.

One day taxpayers will wake up to this extractive regime, i guess until then got to keep highlighing how silly this arrangement is in a country that can't provide a basic social services to taxpayers lol

Always check the money flow folks, that's where the real story is.