The owner of the shuttered Three Mile Island nuclear plant is pursuing a $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee to help finance its plan to restart the Pennsylvania facility and sell the electricity to Microsoft to power data centers, according to details of the application shared with The Washington Post. Get a curated selection of 10 of our best stories in your inbox every weekend.

The taxpayer-backed loan could give Microsoft and Three Mile Island owner Constellation Energy a major boost in their unprecedented bid to steer all the power from a U.S. nuclear plant to a single company.

Microsoft, which declined to comment on the bid for a loan guarantee, is among the large tech companies scouring the nation for zero-emissions power as they seek to build data centers. It is among the leaders in the global competition to dominate the field of artificial intelligence, which consumes enormous amounts of electricity.

  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Great input.

    Meanwhile you just trot out the usual nonsense about how we would all be living in a glorious nuclear utopia if it wasn’t for those pesky oil companies while providing no proof yourself.

    The bottom line is that if nuclear could compete on price then we would be building more nuclear but it’s just not competitive. If you have any regulations that could be done away with in a safe manner and would make a sizable difference to the cost then cite them.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      I never claimed it’d be a utopia. Stop being a jackass.

      Nuclear is cheapclean and safe:

      https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

      https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/charted-safest-and-deadliest-energy-sources/

      Nuclear waste isn’t an issue:

      https://youtu.be/4aUODXeAM-k?si=o6YA2XthpOg6MwV6

      https://youtu.be/lhHHbgIy9jU?si=K0Drxo0xxe_Q7gFe

      Anti-nuclear groups funded by oil companies:

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2016/07/29/cafe-standards-the-next-big-political-battle-over-energy/?

      Regulatory burden dramatically effects nuclear profitability:

      https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/putting-nuclear-regulatory-costs-context/

      I can get more receipts if you want. Anything you still don’t believe?

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          It was a typo. It was meant to say clean, and it was fixed shortly after posting. The one about regulation does discuss cost.

          If you notice on the graph you posted nuclear gets more expensive over time. Why? Everything else gets cheaper over time, until recently where they all increase together. Clearly there’s a temporal link increasing the price of nuclear and it isn’t just expensive always. What has been happening over time to make it more expensive? We pass laws to force it to be unprofitable. It used to be one of the cheapest, and it still is in many places around the world. The US has purposefully made it expensive at the behest of the oil industry.

          Edit: I like that you down voted me for disagreeing but also responding with what you wanted. You’re not a very good person are you?

          • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 hours ago

            As I said, “If you have any regulations that could be done away with in a safe manner and would make a sizable difference to the cost then cite them.”

            If you can’t do that, just say so.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Sea-lioning. Nice. I’m not an expert in the field. I don’t know which regulations do what. I don’t need to prove that to you. The fact that it costs more and takes longer in the US than any other nation, and also that nuclear accidents are extremely rare and safety is high, proves that we have needless regulations. I don’t need to know which ones those are to know that’s true. If you somehow can’t see that without specific regulations being cited, maybe you need to work on your deduction skills.

              • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 hours ago

                The fact that it costs more and takes longer in the US

                Not a fact. Hinckley C in the UK is facing similar cost and time overruns.

                I don’t need to know which ones those are to know that’s true.

                You absolutely do if you don’t want anyone capable of rational thought to think you’re full of shit.

                • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 hours ago

                  “We find that trends in costs have varied significantly in magnitude and in structure by era, country, and experience. In contrast to the rapid cost escalation that characterized nuclear construction in the United States, we find evidence of much milder cost escalation in many countries, including absolute cost declines in some countries and specific eras. Our new findings suggest that there is no inherent cost escalation trend associated with nuclear technology.”

                  As you can see in this chart from the paper, after the Three Mile Island incident, the cost to build a nuclear reactor went up significantly in the US.

                  Clearly this is due to increased regulations after the anti-nuke movement gained so much influence after Three Mile Island, despite the very minor effects of the event itself.

                  “When the full cost experience of US nuclear power is shown with construction duration experience, we observe distinctive trends that change after the Three Mile Island accident. As shown in Fig. 3 in blue, reactors that received their operating licenses before the TMI accident experience mild cost escalation. But for reactors that were under construction during Three Mile Island and eventually completed afterwards, shown in red, median costs are 2.8 times higher than pre-TMI costs and median durations are 2.2 times higher than pre-TMI durations. Post-TMI, overnight costs rise with construction duration, even though OCC excludes the costs of interest during construction. This suggests that other duration-related issues such as licensing, regulatory delays, or back-fit requirements are a significant contributor to the rising OCC trend.”

                  Good enough for you?

                  You absolutely do if you don’t want anyone capable of rational thought to think you’re full of shit.

                  No, you do not. I can be assured the sun makes things warmer by showing a graph of temperature based on the position of the sun in the sky. I don’t need to know precisely what fussion reactions are happening in the sun to know the cause. If you aren’t capable of that then that’s on you. No one else needs to know the exact cause to see correlations that point towards the cause.

                  Edit: Based on history you’re already responding, but I thought I should include the global trend graph from the paper too. In some other nations it’s gotten cheaper over time. The US is by far the worst of making it more expensive over time, despite technology and knowledge advancing.

                  I recommend going through the study yourself though.

                  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    Clearly this is due to increased regulations

                    So name one.

                    As we’ve established, you can’t. You’re not a serious person and so I’m not going to waste any more of my time on you.

                    You’re like every other nuclear bro I’ve interacted with; no amount of evidence, logic, or facts will persuade you because you didn’t use those to come to your present position. You’re a Japanese holdout, still flighting the war long after your side lost.

                    Oh, but it’s regulations, you say. That pesky red tape that I can’t cite even once even though it definitely 100% is because that’s what my feels tell me.

                    I expect to see you again in another nuclear discussion saying the same shit you’re saying now and you’ll probably still be saying it even after the last reactor on earth is decommissioned.