Live data from Hacker News

US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

arstechnica.com

301–310 of 585 posts

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#301
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intentionally doing damage started with DOGE. So, roughly day 1.

[flagged]

Those "savings" have not withstood careful analysis. Essentially they're nonsense and with the damage they have done the final bill will be much higher than any savings.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Pollutant-wise, are you insinuating that solar and wind and battery manufacturing is more polluting overall than the extraction and burning of fossil fuels they replace?

Parent deleted his comment with insults and got flagged dead. Perhaps insulting those with legitimate questions and people who have long-term accounts (indicating a lack of low-effort brigading ala reddit) isn't the best method, particularly when you don't respond to any of those questions. A bit of a "look in the mirror" moment.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#303

Years ago, this very subject was an interview question at a national lab (at an undergrad level). The question was roughly: > the ends of windmill blades look a lot like a jet on radar. If you were assigned to this project, what would your approach be to avoiding false positives? This was in 2011/2012. I find it difficult to believe the problem is not solved.

It has been solved. Get rid of all the windmills. Easy.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overregulation. Americans love to remove regulation to make things cheaper (and to enable capitalistic monopolies, but that's a different matter), then cry when people die (or worse). Some things needs to be regulated, esp. if mistakes are costly to the planet and/or people on the said planet. So yes, nuclear should be regulated, and even overregulated to keep it safe. We have seen what Boeing has become when it's…

So yes, nuclear should be regulated, and even overregulated to keep it safe. Here's what overregulation of nuclear power has done for us over the past several decades: "We can't risk releasing radioactive pollution in an accident, so we'll build coal plants that spew it into the air during normal operation instead."

Sounds like the other systems are under regulated.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#305
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overregulation. Americans love to remove regulation to make things cheaper (and to enable capitalistic monopolies, but that's a different matter), then cry when people die (or worse). Some things needs to be regulated, esp. if mistakes are costly to the planet and/or people on the said planet. So yes, nuclear should be regulated, and even overregulated to keep it safe. We have seen what Boeing has become when it's…

Regulation, I’d argue, is a far more efficient route to monopoly than “unchecked capitalism”. If you have enough money you can gain regulatory capture. If you pay close attention the majority of “evil capitalists” the far left bitches and whines about so much are masters at this. Last mile service, car manufactures, medicine, law, construction, power, water, technology, banking, housing, etc. Most of the world’s bill…

>I’d argue

You could, but it's without any basis or evidence.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#306

This is a road to serfdom (and/or a road to 1789 France) situation with what's happening to energy prices in the past couple years[1]. The price of new solar+battery and wind should be pushing fossil fuel energy prices off a cliff right now, unless you live in a petrostate. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU000072610

The UK has tons of wind power but prices there are exceptionally high. Offshore wind isn't as cost effective as solar, it's the poster boy for high-cost, low-value renewable energy

Now imagine if you paid for a giant wind project that never produced a Joule. Great for energy prices.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#307

What the... It seems we crossed into the realm of intentionally doing damage. I'm reminded of threatening tariffs to successfully derail global carbon levy on ship emissions. Meanwhile China runs away with all the clean energy tech (solar, wind, batteries, etc, etc.) while we hold to fossil fuels to save less than 200,000 jobs.

>while we hold to fossil fuels to save less than 200,000 jobs.

No, not for jobs. Profits, stock bumps, and bonuses for the execs at oil companies and friends of the admin.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly not a terrible idea. Just have your reactor on a huge barge and if it goes meltdown just drag it out into international waters and let the fish deal with it /s

An actual meltdown at sea would have the now-molten uranium come in contact with seawater, which would instantly flash to high-pressure steam, throwing the uranium into a cancer-causing cloud that the world has never yet seen. This is absolutely a terrible idea about how to deal with a meltdown.

Doing the math, it looks like the amount of uranium in pre-disaster Chernobyl is 200 metric tons. Apparently, that can bring 333ML (133 Olympic sized swimming pools) of room temperature water to a boil.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US deploys nuclear energy at over $10/watt meanwhile solar and wind are deployed around $2/watt (for levelized cost of electricity) including battery storage which means they are deployed for roughly the same cost as natural gas (so, direct competitors). Don't let comments like this fool you, nuclear is far from being competitive with natural gas. Even in countries like south korea that can deploy nuclear the cheapes…

Nuclear is insane levels of expensive likely due to overregulation. It is important for base load power and overnight power and should always be the backing of the grid frequency. Total loss of grid frequency is much more difficult to recover from with synthetic inertia. A healthy grid should have all of the following - Nuclear base load that keeps the grid stable and pick up from low solar - Gas plants for surge pow…

Grid forming inverters for providing virtual inertia are only going to get better and better, there's no reason that as those control systems improve why synthetic inertia won't be able to be basically identical to real spinning mass. In the meantime while that technology matures, synchronous condensers can provide grid inertia without needing nuclear or coal, we already have about four in Australia supporting our grid and will probably have another dozen or so built over the next decade or two.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their economy grew 3% this year and they cut emissions. https://rhg.com/research/chinas-economy-rightsizing-2025-loo... "economic slowdown" is an exaggeration.

A 3% GDP growth this year is a slowdown from 2024. Did you read this paper? I encourage you to at least read the abstract. It discusses whether "China's 2025 economic growth story turns on whether investment merely declined in the second half of the year or collapsed."

You seem to be confusing first and second derivatives.
Post reply on HN