• snoons@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Well yeah, it’s a service. Expecting profit from necessary services is stupid and counter-productive but it makes a few people rich so of course it happens then you get memes like this.

    • VibeSurgeon@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Efficient use of resources still matters in a service-driven model.

      The service in this case is to provide electricity - if other alternatives can provide the same system of electricity while using less resources in the process, then it is clearly preferable.

      • overcast5348@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Externalized costs are a thing though. For instance, a coal plant spewing smoke (and radiation) costs everyone else money. A nuclear plant OTOH is usually responsible for dealing with all of its own shit. So it’s not always an apples to apples comparison to consider just the profitability of a project.

        • VibeSurgeon@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Absolutely. I don’t know that anyone is arguing for coal, except for Trump, but he’s also completely deranged.

          Wind and solar have very little externalities, however. I’d even call their externalities trivial.

        • Holla@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It sure isn’t apples to apples, but it’s also not like nuclear plants actually dealt with their waste

          • Philote@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Are you talking about current nuclear plants or the first generation ones built in the 50’s. Because that’s like using steam train safety to negate the use of modern trains.

            • Holla@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Oh, I must’ve missed the point where nuclear plants started turning their fuel into mere satisfaction. Good thing the waste from the 50s is still around, I’m sure they can take care of it!

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The things are very much run as private companies under the pretense of being profitable. The whole purpose of nukes (other than providing weapons grade material) is shoveling public money into private pockets.