Ordering the Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission \ stacker news ~Politics_And

I occasionally find myself in an X thread about new reactor designs, and I get a strong sense of if-only. I don't know how much weight these kinds of actions have in reality, but I'd love to see us producing more nuclear energy (supposing it's safe).

It is the policy of the United States to: (a) Reestablish the United States as the global leader in nuclear energy; (b) Facilitate increased deployment of new nuclear reactor technologies, such as Generation III+ and IV reactors, modular reactors, and microreactors, including by lowering regulatory and cost barriers to entry; (c) Facilitate the expansion of American nuclear energy capacity from approximately 100 GW in 2024 to 400 GW by 2050; (d) Employ emerging technologies to safely accelerate the modeling, simulation, testing, and approval of new reactor designs; (e) Support the continued operation of, and facilitate appropriate operational extensions for, the current nuclear fleet, as well as the reactivation of prematurely shuttered or partially completed nuclear facilities; and (f) Maintain the United States’ leading reputation for nuclear safety.

59 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 24 May

How long before the anti-Trumpers have this in a judge-shopped court room and a nation-wide temporary restraining order that looks more like a permanent restraining order in place? The idea behind the shift to renewables is not about generating ecologically sound power, but to control us and destroy our economies. Europe is a very good example, as in Germany, Spain and the UK. They are being destroyed, not doing anything for the planet. I hope that the new nuclear power plant permission goes through, though. I sure would like to see manufactured nuclear generators that are brought to place on regular flat-bed trucks and installed like air-conditioners!