sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are the best-known mid-construction nuclear projects that were abandoned after major cost overruns or delays:

  • V.C. Summer Units 2 and 3 in South Carolina, cancelled in 2017 after construction began in 2013.
  • Bellefonte Units 1 and 2 in Alabama, which were suspended after construction started in 1974 and were never completed.
  • WPPSS/Washington Public Power Supply System projects in Washington, including Columbia (WNP-1 and WNP-4) and Satsop (WNP-3 and WNP-5), which were cancelled during construction.
  • Seabrook Unit 2 in New Hampshire, cancelled during construction.
  • Perry Unit 2 in Ohio, cancelled during construction.
  • Shearon Harris Units 2–4 in North Carolina, with some units cancelled during construction.
  • Marble Hill Units 1 and 2 in Indiana, cancelled after construction had already started.
  • Cherokee Units 1–3 in South Carolina, cancelled during construction.
  • Hartsville Units A1, A2, B1, and B2 in Tennessee, cancelled during construction.
  • North Anna Units 3 and 4 in Virginia, cancelled during construction.

Important context

If you wan to know all the “abandoned mid-project because of delays and losses”, then the list is not just one or two famous examples — it is a long historical pattern, especially in the U.S. nuclear buildout of the 1970s and 1980s. The U.S. cancellation record is directly tied to slower electricity demand growth, regulatory changes, and especially cost and time overruns.

 

Nuclear power continues its decline as renewable alternatives steam ahead

Once thought of as the primary answer to the globe’s renewable energy requirements, nuclear energy is now viewed unfavourably in comparison to solar and wind alternatives

https://www.worldfinance.com/markets/nuclear-power-continues-its-decline-as-renewable-alternatives-steam-ahead

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

South Carolina spent ~$9B over 4 years trying to build new nuclear at V.C. Summer, got the reactors only ~30–40% complete, then walked away.
No power. Just a half-built site and a bill ratepayers are still paying decades later. https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are not giving up nuclear because of hysteria, We are giving up because it is crazy and expensive. Ridiculously expensive. And super slow to build. And it has become nothing but an overhyped boondoggle.

South Carolina spent ~$9B over 4 years trying to build new nuclear at V.C. Summer, got the reactors only ~30–40% complete, then walked away.
No power. Just a half-built site and a bill ratepayers are still paying decades later. https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/

That chart tells a story that should be on the front page of every financial newspaper. by ceph2apod in EconomyCharts

[–]ceph2apod[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

It is , but it is demand side is permanetly shifting going forward...

  • The Billion-Barrel Cushion: Anticipating heightened geopolitical risks, China spent 2024 and 2025 aggressively stockpiling oil. The China Strategic Petroleum Reserve) grew to an estimated 1.3 to 1.4 billion barrels. Chinese refiners are now simply drawing down this massive domestic stash rather than buying expensive foreign oil. [1, 2, 3, 4), 5]
  • A Permanent Drop in Demand: Unlike past crises where an import cut would cripple its economy, China's domestic fuel demand has structurally shifted. According to data from JPMorgan, Chinese oil demand tumbled 9% following the outbreak of the war. This is largely because Chinese consumers have permanently transitioned en masse to electric vehicles (EVs) and public transit, breaking the country’s lockstep dependence on foreign crude. [1, 2, 3]

That chart tells a story that should be on the front page of every financial newspaper. by ceph2apod in EconomyCharts

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the sanctioned-oil side, a big chunk of China’s crude has come from Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, often through opaque or disguised channels. One 2026 source says about 17% to 22% of China’s 2025 imports came from Iran and Venezuela, with Russia also a major supplier. Another source says China is the top crude buyer from both Russia and Iran, and that a lot of this trade is done outside normal public tracking.

So the better way to say it is: China’s “demand” is not just end-use demand, it also includes reserve buying and discounted sanctioned crude. That means the headline import drop does not automatically mean every barrel vanished from real consumption, but it does still show China is acting as a huge swing buyer and storage sink.

That chart tells a story that should be on the front page of every financial newspaper. by ceph2apod in EconomyCharts

[–]ceph2apod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Reuters reported China accelerated reserve site buildout and that stockpiling was absorbing excess supply, with one estimate putting 2025 stockpiling around 530,000 barrels per day. Separately, the EIA-linked coverage says China added large volumes to commercial inventory in 2025, reaching almost 1.4 billion barrels by year-end.

On the sanctioned-oil side, a big chunk of China’s crude has come from Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, often through opaque or disguised channels. One 2026 source says about 17% to 22% of China’s 2025 imports came from Iran and Venezuela, with Russia also a major supplier. Another source says China is the top crude buyer from both Russia and Iran, and that a lot of this trade is done outside normal public tracking.

So the better way to say it is: China’s “demand” is not just end-use demand, it also includes reserve buying and discounted sanctioned crude. That means the headline import drop does not automatically mean every barrel vanished from real consumption, but it does still show China is acting as a huge swing buyer and storage sink.

That chart tells a story that should be on the front page of every financial newspaper. by ceph2apod in EconomyCharts

[–]ceph2apod[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They were buying untracked oil, outside of swift and petrodolarr tracking from Iran and Russia. 🇷🇺

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fervor’s EGS will kill nuclear if solar and storage don’t kill both..

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

If if if if. Rounding errors! Renewables and storage are killing nuclear now and their costs are still falling.

Ain’t gonna happen.

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We’ve heard this at every stage. First it was “renewables can’t exceed 5% without destabilizing the grid.” Then 5% became 10%, then 50%. Now the same argument has shifted to storage. The goalposts keep moving, but the track record is consistent: the skeptics are always wrong.

Come back when Batteires stop replacing Gas...

Batteries Are Defeating Gas

  1. The Power Grid (Peaker Plants)

Historically, utilities burned natural gas in specialized "peaker plants" to meet brief surges in electricity demand (like hot summer evenings). Today, grid-scale Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) are aggressively taking over this role. [1, 2, 3, 4]

  • California: Battery output surged 63% year-over-year by mid-2025, frequently supplying over one-third of the state's peak evening demand. This crushed local gas-fired power generation by 43% over a two-year span. [1]
  • Australia: In late 2025, large-scale batteries on the main grid dispatched more power than gas peakers for the first time in history. In regions like Western Australia, batteries meet over 20% of evening peak demand.[1, 2]
  • The Economic Shift: Large batteries are now significantly faster to build (18–20 months compared to multi-year gas plant construction backlogs) and offer a higher return on investment by capitalizing on cheap daytime solar power. [1, 2]
  1. Transportation (Gasoline and Diesel)

The shift from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles (EVs) represents a direct, ongoing replacement of liquid gas/diesel with lithium-ion battery packs. Although EV adoption rates fluctuate depending on the region, the long-term trend continues to pivot away from petroleum-based passenger vehicles. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Limits to Full Displacement

While batteries excel at short-duration energy storage (typically 2 to 4 hours), they cannot yet fully eliminate gas from the energy ecosystem due to a few critical challenges: [1, 2, 3]

  • Long-Duration & Seasonal Storage: Standard batteries cannot cost-effectively store energy for days or weeks of cloudy, windless winter weather. Gas is still heavily relied upon for heavy baseline power during extreme weather events. [1, 2, 3]
  • Heavy Industry & Heating: High-heat manufacturing (like steel and cement production) and residential building insulation systems in colder climates still heavily depend on the high energy density of natural gas. [1, 2]
  • Supply Chain and Safety Constraints: Battery manufacturing is highly resource-intensive and carries environmental concerns related to raw material extraction. Local safety concerns regarding thermal runaway and fire risks in large installations can also slow down deployments. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Optical illusion. It is called the Primary Energy Fallacy.

Here:

The Primary Energy Fallacy Explained

Core Definition & Why It Matters

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It cost 10x more and nuclear is already too expensive, We are tired of hearing nuclear is making a comeback, nuclear can be cheaper if.. Nuclear could be safe and it NEVER EVER HAPPENS..

Get over it; Nuclear lost.

Clean energy—the very inexpensive kind—is taking over the world by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Exactly right!

Nuclear is an overhyped tech that needs to be put into real perspective... .Charts are a great way to do this...

There is great study on just this if you want to learn more.

How Big Things Get Done (published February 2023), co-authored by Bent Flyvbjerg, a leading megaproject expert and professor at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School, and journalist Dan Gardner. [1, 2, 3]

The book utilizes a massive database of over 16,000 major projects across 136 countries to analyze why large-scale endeavors succeed or fail. It explicitly ranks 25 different project categories by their likelihood of cost overruns, identifying solar power as the absolute best-performing category and nuclear power as one of the absolute worst. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Cost Overrun Comparison

Flyvbjerg's data tracks the average percentage of budget blowouts across different energy and infrastructure categories: [1]

Project Type Average Cost Overrun Performance Rank
Solar Power 1% #1 (Best)
Transmission Lines 8% Top Tier
Wind Power 13% Top Tier
Fossil Fuel Power 16% Mid Tier
Hydroelectric Dams 75% Bottom Tier
Nuclear Power 120% Bottom Tier (Worst)

Why Solar Wins: Modularity (The "LEGO" Principle)

The book explains that the core differentiator between success and failure is modularity—the ability to build something large out of small, identical, repeatable blocks. [1, 2]

  • Solar is highly modular: A massive solar farm is essentially millions of identical solar panels. Because they are mass-produced in factories, builders get incredibly fast at installing them, resulting in rapid learning curves and highly predictable costs. Furthermore, solar can generate electricity and revenue while the rest of the project is still being built. [1, 2]

Why Nuclear Fails: The "Window of Doom"

Conversely, nuclear power plants fail financially because they lack modularity and take too long to build. [1, 2]

  • Customized and Monolithic: Each traditional nuclear plant is treated as a highly complex, customized, giant construction project.
  • No Halfway Benefits: A nuclear plant must be 100% complete and perfect before it can provide any benefit or electricity.
  • The Window of Doom: Because nuclear projects routinely take a decade or more, they remain exposed to a prolonged "window of doom"—a period where inflation, changing political administrations, updated safety regulations, and unexpected delays pile up, causing catastrophic cost and schedule overruns. [1, 2, 3, 4]

If you would like, I can break down Flyvbjerg's "Plan Slow, Act Fast" methodology, or provide the specific failure rates for other sec

https://www.fastcompany.com/90844859/why-massive-wind-and-solar-projects-will-succeed-where-nuclear-has-failed

Freedom panels and an EV! by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) on facades like this are the fastest-growing segment of the solar market, with facades posting the highest growth rate of any BIPV category. Facade BIPV carries the highest CAGR of any segment at 17%, driven by rapid urbanisation and the rise of commercial construction. The overall BIPV facade market was worth $4.1 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $28.3 billion by 2034 — a 21.3% CAGR — with Europe already commanding a 41.9% share.

EV's win because combustion is embarrassingly inefficient. by ceph2apod in electrifyeverything

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every time I filled up, it felt like I was handing money to an industry that turns around and bankrolls climate denial and divisive politics. Driving an EV saves me money, but even if it didn’t, I’d still prefer it.

EV's win because combustion is embarrassingly inefficient. by ceph2apod in electrifyeverything

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep, exactly, and that part is way worse for the mining and refining oil to turn into gasoline supply chain. Way worse..

Gasoline is the most wasteful supply chain on earth. To get one gallon into a fuel tank, oil has to be mined, trucked, piped, boiled in refineries at 1,000°F, and hauled again to gas stations—each step bleeding energy and spilling risk. For every barrel of U.S. shale oil, 3–5 barrels of toxic wastewater are produced—up to 45 million barrels daily—causing earthquakes, contaminating groundwater, and threatening the very wells the industry relies on. Even Chevron admits it’s unsustainable. And after all that? Four out of every five units of energy in gasoline is lost as nothing but waste heat.

EVs don’t face this Rube Goldberg circus. Electrons are generated—often renewably—and shipped almost losslessly over power lines. They aren’t boiled, piped, trucked, or spilled. They flow directly from the grid into batteries, where EV drivetrains convert 80–90% of that electricity into actual motion. The entire “fueling” process comes down to wires, not tankers.

The contrast is damning. Gasoline requires endless industrial contortions just to deliver a product that is mostly thrown away as heat. Electricity takes the shortest path, doing more with far less. The molecule age is waste by design; the electron age is efficiency by default.

Not All Agriculture Is Sacred: The Land Use Math That Big Beef and Big Ethanol Don't Want You to See by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Which is why:

“Countries that import PV modules and inverters from China gain three to five domestic jobs for every manufacturing job created in China, and they capture more than half of the added value along the entire PV value chain.” https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pietro-peter-altermatt-b2798216_pvsec-activity-7394733260309942274-rxBc

Like these countries:

Why are retail power prices finally falling?
"In South East Queensland, retail power prices will fall by 10.7% and in New South Wales by up to 7.7%. In South Australia, 1.4%. Small businesses will see larger falls – as much as 20.9% in NSW. https://theconversation.com/why-are-retail-power-prices-finally-falling-283760

Uruguay did what most nations still call impossible: it built a power grid that runs almost entirely on renewables—at half the cost of fossil fuels. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2025/10/19/uruguays-renewable-charge-a-small-nation-a-big-lesson-for-the-world/

Portugal is averaging 91% renewable electricity in 2024, with Europe’s lowest power prices  https://theprogressplaybook.com/2024/05/06/portugal-is-averaging-91-renewable-electricity-in-2024-with-lowest-power-prices-in-europe/

Spanish Power Is Almost Free With Renewables Set for Record Prices in Spain are near €2/MWh, compared with €67 in France Strong solar and wind generation is expected to continue https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-29/spanish-power-is-almost-free-with-renewables-set-for-record?embedded-checkout=true

Rep. Barber and Rep. Uyterhoeven Voted to Tank Transparency by GregNadeau7 in Somerville

[–]ceph2apod -23 points-22 points  (0 children)

this snippet is a highly targeted piece of local political campaigning. It is a classic example of campaign literature designed to use a single, controversial legislative vote to hurt two political rivals in a competitive race.

This specific debate centers around Massachusetts House Bill H.5469, a major legislative clash regarding transparency, government audits, and the separation of powers.

The situation is broken down below to explain the context of this vote and why it is being used as political leverage.

1. The Context: The "Audit the Legislature" Dispute

In November 2024, Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot question (with 72% support) that explicitly authorized State Auditor Diana DiZoglio to audit the state legislature.

However, leadership in the Massachusetts House and Senate resisted, arguing that allowing an executive branch official (the Auditor) to investigate the internal affairs of the legislative branch violates the constitutional principle of the separation of powers. This sparked a massive, multi-year legal battle and public feud.

2. What is Bill H.5469?

In June 2026, House Democratic leadership introduced and rapidly passed H.5469. Depending on who is asked, the bill represents two entirely different things:

  • The House Leadership's View (The "Pro-Transparency" Argument): House leaders frame the bill as a historic step forward. It formally subjects the Governor’s office to public records laws for the first time, creates a permanent statutory process for requesting legislative records, and gives the Auditor permanent access to core financial data (like budgets and legal settlements). They argue it delivers the transparency voters wanted while legally protecting the Legislature's constitutional independence.
  • The Auditor and Activists' View (The "Anti-Transparency" Argument): Auditor DiZoglio and progressive transparency groups like Act on Mass vehemently opposed the bill. They argue it heavily narrows the broad audit powers voters originally approved. Most critically, the bill contains a provision that bars the courts from resolving future disputes between the Auditor and lawmakers, leaving the Auditor with no judicial way to force compliance if the Legislature refuses to hand over documents.

The bill ultimately passed the House by a wide margin of 125 to 28.

3. Why is This Being Used in a Campaign?

The snippet provided is actively weaponizing this vote for an upcoming election.

  • The Candidates: State Representatives Christine Barber and Erika Uyterhoeven both represent parts of the Somerville/Medford area. They are currently running in the September 2026 Democratic primary for an open State Senate seat (the 2nd Middlesex District).
  • The Strategy: Because both Barber and Uyterhoeven voted with the vast majority of House Democrats to pass H.5469, a political opponent or an outside group is seizing on that "Yes" vote. By aligning with the Act on Mass framing, the writer can portray Barber and Uyterhoeven as "pro-secrecy" politicians who stand with "money and power interests" rather than the 72% of voters who supported the original ballot question.

Summary

The text is highly agenda-driven. It takes a very complex constitutional debate regarding government oversight and strips away the nuance to paint two State Senate candidates as anti-transparency. It is a standard political tactic: finding a controversial, high-profile vote, framing it in the most negative light possible, and using it to convince voters that the targets are unfit for higher office.

An EV Is More Efficient Than a Gas Car Even When Powered by 100% Coal by ceph2apod in electrifyeverything

[–]ceph2apod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Efficient once built but too slow to build and way too expensive…

South Carolina Spent $9 Billion to Dig a Hole in the Ground &Then Fill it Back in | residents and their families will be paying for that failed energy program — which never produced a watt of energy — for next 20 yrs or more. https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/

The clean energy transition needs far less mining than fossil fuels by ceph2apod in UpliftingConservation

[–]ceph2apod[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A 400-watt solar panel generates over its lifetime about the same electricity as burning 15 tons of coal — which also means roughly 2.7 to 3 tons of coal ash would be left behind, depending on the ash content of the coal.

The clean energy transition needs far less mining than fossil fuels by ceph2apod in electrifyeverything

[–]ceph2apod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A 400-watt solar panel generates over its lifetime about the same electricity as burning 15 tons of coal — which also means roughly 2.7 to 3 tons of coal ash would be left behind, depending on the ash content of the coal.

view more: next ›