[T]he report’s executive summary certainly gets to the heart of their findings.

“The rhetoric from small modular reactor (SMR) advocates is loud and persistent: This time will be different because the cost overruns and schedule delays that have plagued large reactor construction projects will not be repeated with the new designs,” says the report. “But the few SMRs that have been built (or have been started) paint a different picture – one that looks startlingly similar to the past. Significant construction delays are still the norm and costs have continued to climb.”

  • WhiteHotaru@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Because if the military wants something, budgets are big. And they do not need to make money.

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Gotta love how the post office is legally required to show they can turn a profit, but the military has a history of building literal burn pits that essentially burn US tax dollars by lighting equipment on fire and giving soldiers cancer.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t think the military should show a profit. That would just bring back colonialism. Although, they do make a hefty profit for defense contractors.

          • Zron@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            The fact that this was your take away is concerning.

            No government service should have to show a profit. If it’s an essential service, then it needs to be done. The only time money should come into it is in regular audits to ensure the budget is being used efficiently.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yup, the military’s purpose is to not be needed. It should be strong enough to deter attack and assist diplomacy (carrot and stick), and no larger. Our (US) military is bigger than that, so it gets used in place of diplomacy.

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

          https://www.teenvogue.com/story/most-ridiculous-things-united-states-military-spent-money-on

          Boner pills, anti-rape lip balm (which they destroyed) and other such brilliant things.

          And the margins for DoD contracts can be through the roof.

          During her face-off with manufacturing company TransDigm at the hearing, AOC questioned the company’s alleged price gouging on a small metal part, called a “non-vehicular clutch disc,” that the government purchases for the Department of Defense.

          According to the congresswoman from the Bronx, the part is about 3 inches in size and costs TransDigm $32 to produce — which is why she’s pissed the company is charging $1,443 per disc. The company reportedly sold the government 149 discs for $215,000.