Technology

57435 readers

3629 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

279

First planned small nuclear reactor plant in the US has been canceled (arstechnica.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Maybe. I would imagine that having all the portions built at one location and shipped/installed at the site would be quicker and have less variation in final cost.

The last US nuclear power plant built wound up being 7 years late and a face shattering $17,000,000,000 over budget. Who wants something to take an extra unexpected 7 years to have something built and pay seventeen billion dollars more than you planned on to get it?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Less land required as well which is also cheaper.

But ya, being and to produce them in a factory was going to be a big savings. They'd get cheaper as things improved.