sadfacenogains

joined 3 years ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children)

~~Fun fact, the early opposition to nuclear power from environmentalists was not because of safety but because they were afraid that cheap power would contribute to overpopulation~~

EDIT : This may be false. I got it from reading multiple blogs that said the same thing but gave no source

 

I'm 100% convinced there is an oil/coal lobby conspiracy here. Nuclear used to cost $3000/kw in the fucking 80s, still does in China.

America needs 700GW of Nuclear power for 100% nuclear energy AND to charge EVs. That's just $2.1 trillion to COMPLETELY decarbonize both energy and transport. That's 3 years of military budget, we could have done this 40 years ago :agony-consuming:

For the UK, even assuming a conservative $5k/kW cost of construction, it would cost $250 billion to fully nuclearize the electricity grid. That's 1% of the GDP over 10 years. This 1-2% over 10-15 years figure applies more or less to all developed countries.

There is ample evidence of coal/oil interests frustrating nuclear power construction through sockpuppet environmental NGOs, lobbying to hamper nuclear development, anti-nuclear propaganda etc.

Here are 5 reasons why capital doesn't want nuclear:

  1. Nuclear is structurally unprofitable. It requires massive initial capital investment, and there are very little running costs to profit from. Nuclear power has never been profitable anywhere, BUT IT DOESNT MATTER. It is still massively beneficial to humanity. It is living proof that profitability is not the only metric for a better society, and in fact can actively hamper building a better society.

  2. Nuclear lasts 60-80 years, modern designs could even last 100 years. Coal, Oil and even wind turbines, solar, need continual gradual replacement. See why fossil interests support wind and solar, and oppose nuclear? It's better for them to have a constant stream of revenue. :capitalist-laugh:

  3. Virtually all reactors are owned by the state, for reasons of profitability. Nuclear is a socialist source of power, private corporations HATE that! There is a reason why China is going all in on nuclear. The Soviet Union also was planning on making nuclear it's primary source.

  4. Resource extraction industries also extract rent, i.e super profits (according to Ricardian theory of differential rent). Uranium is a tiny fraction of nuclear costs, can't have that, gotta get that oil/coal/gas rent.

  5. Solar/Wind requires trillions in energy storage, that's another massive cost to humanity, but for capital - a massive source of profit :capitalist:

Edit : China built a 6000MW nuclear power plant for $10 billion. At that cost, it would cost USA just $1.2 trillion to go full nuclear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangjiang_Nuclear_Power_Station

 

And dont give me your fucking mayo ass "b-but dogs are b-best friend", cattle have done far more for the human race in terms of food, milk, leather and work. We are monsters. Accept it and embrace it if you love meat, but don't give me that fucking Western chauvinist moral superiority bullshit.

1
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

spoilerincluding me, and reading the manifesto and first chapter of capital doesnt count

 

Like seriously, why isn't there at least one single leader or famous person who is uncompromisingly anticapitalist, good at organizing, gives rousing speeches and is actually willing to do illegal shit, get arrested, inspire people, actually writes new, relevant and useful theory and generally be an icon?

I keep reading about how we are entering the one of the most turbulent decades in history. Who do we have to represent us other than socdem politicians, podcasters and journalists? We are letting crisis after crisis go to waste. We are just wasting away...