
Should Disney World Have the Right to Build a Nuclear Power Plant? - cienega
https://www.citylab.com/environment/2019/05/disney-build-nuclear-reactor-orlando-florida-legal-history/587950/
======
munk-a
I really wish nuclear power would stop getting all this unnecessary hate -
apparently in the grand canyon there was a bucket of uranium[1] sitting in a
storage closet, this wasn't particularly dangerous but far more dangerous than
a well regulated power plant would be. We need to stop being irrational about
the power source that may end up saving the planet.

[1] [https://www.npr.org/2019/02/19/696001017/grand-canyon-
museum...](https://www.npr.org/2019/02/19/696001017/grand-canyon-museum-
reportedly-had-buckets-of-uranium-sitting-around-for-18-year)

~~~
tobib
There is also the problem of nuclear waste being highly radioactive for
thousands of years and us not knowing how to deal with it properly.

~~~
aeneasmackenzie
1\. Dig a hole

2\. Put a fence around the hole

3\. Put a sign on the fence saying "if you cross this fence you will die"

4\. Put radioactive waste in the hole

5\. Cover the hole

It's not a complicated problem.

~~~
D_Alex
"We cannot guarantee that any simple or complex message, even when recognized
and correctly interpreted, will deter a human being from inappropriate
action."

From [https://prod-ng.sandia.gov/techlib-noauth/access-
control.cgi...](https://prod-ng.sandia.gov/techlib-noauth/access-
control.cgi/1992/921382.pdf)

See also [https://www.damninteresting.com/this-place-is-not-a-place-
of...](https://www.damninteresting.com/this-place-is-not-a-place-of-honor/)

~~~
mc32
Unless humanity reverts to a pre industrial state, future inhabitants should
have tech to detect radioactive material —just as we can now. If we fall to a
pre industrial state, it’s doubtful we’d be able to get to the buried waste
material like Yucca mountain.

~~~
toper-centage
Just add Geiger sensors to phones. If it goes beyond a certain level, you lose
data connection. Then watch the people flock away.

------
mimixco
The legal machinations Disney went through to secure the site for The Florida
Project, as it was then called, are unprecedented and will never be repeated.
Disney _is_ the government there.

The rationale was that Disney knew more about safety and engineering than the
cities that surrounded the property. And you know what? They were right. A
drive through the area will make it obvious as soon as you hit Disney property
(40 sq miles or larger than Manhattan, BTW). It's cleaner and safer with
better roads, signs, and landscaping. There are no overhead power lines, for
example. Even their parking lots are smarter with sensors that lead you to the
nearest empty space.

Having said that, I don't think they would ever attempt a nuke plant and I'm
glad about that.

~~~
munk-a
> Having said that, I don't think they would ever attempt a nuke plant and I'm
> glad about that.

I'm... not?

If they did it well they could demystify and de-...demonize nuclear power and
maybe return some of that "Magic of Science" feeling they were famous for
before the 90s. Disney was a real innovator back in the day, I'd be quite
happy to see them take on nuclear power and do it well - maybe with a Gen4
reactor like thorium MSR.

~~~
mimixco
I'm not sure tritium-laced drinking fountains would go over well with Disney's
safety team, nor their guests.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
There _might_ be possibilities between "no nuclear power plant" and "tritium-
laced drinking fountains".

~~~
mimixco
That would be great! Let's get that tech for Turkey Point.

~~~
acct1771
Can you elaborate?

Also, credit where credit is due: "Turkey Point has been a contributing force
to the reclassification of the American crocodile from endangered to the less
serious category of vulnerable." \- Wiki

~~~
mimixco
Yes. It leaks radioactive tritium, like the vast majority of nuclear plants.

------
wizardforhire
I mean yeah I get the immediate fear monger response to the contrary a
headline like this is meant to illicit, but... nuclear power plants are
already built but private companies. Disney clearly has the capitol and I can
think of no better company to run a nuclear power plant than disney! Think of
their proven track record and commitment to maintence, and the culture that
inevitably has had to subsequintly evolve to maintain that commitment to
maintenance. Seriously there’s not another company like them that’s even in
the same ballpark as to the level to attention to detail that they’ve been
able to pull off for over half a century!

------
FireBeyond
> It created the Reedy Creek Improvement District, making Disney World its own
> tightly controlled governmental entity with its own laws. Disney has the
> power, for example, to create its own police force, even though it hasn’t so
> far.

It has, however, created its own Fire Department.

~~~
mimixco
Actually, they do have their own police force and also an on-property jail.
Nearly all Disney security personnel are undercover, dressed as tourists or
other kinds of workers so as not to be off-putting to guests.

The book _Vinyl Leaves_ is an incredible and comprehensive look at many of the
secrets behind the Disney empire.

~~~
ceejayoz
Security forces and police forces are not the same thing.

Disney has both security - with no arrest powers - and contracts with Orange
County Sheriff's Office to staff on-duty officers. "Jail" means a security
office where they detain you while waiting for the cops to cart you off, just
like a shoplifter at a store might sit for a few minutes in the manager's
office awaiting the cops.

[https://www.clickorlando.com/news/disney-world-law-
enforceme...](https://www.clickorlando.com/news/disney-world-law-enforcement-
spending-increases)

------
mjevans
Yes, please, let them keep the option. In 20-50 years when we are actually
willing to build these things the correct way again I want everyone to have
that option.

------
Iv
In Florida Walt Disney had a greater plan than another theme park. He wanted
to try and provide a living experience, a prototype for the cities of the
future. He died before this could happen but the original plans for EPCOT were
epic:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPCOT_(concept)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPCOT_\(concept\))

That's why they wanted a power plant, to be independent from that
externatlity. With Walt, that plan died.

I am pretty pro-nuclear but that's probably not a bad idea to refresh an
agreement made during the 60s and either revoke it or add some security
constraints.

The last thing you want if you are pro-nuclear is another scandal of a nuclear
power plant being poorly handled.

------
taborj
Youtuber Rob Plays did a video[1] about this as well

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEbqhJQKaVE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEbqhJQKaVE)

~~~
mimixco
Good one! Thanks.

------
ZhuanXia
Disney was a great genius, and his charter city was extremely ambitious. It is
amazing how far he got. I think he may have succeeded if he had lived.

EPCOT is an insult to his vision.

~~~
mimixco
His brother, Roy, and the other members of the Board _did_ want to do the full
Epcot but they didn't think they could pull it off without him.

------
sunkenvicar
There’s a surprising amount of FUDD in here regarding nuclear power. Nuclear
power is the only serious option we have for clean, reliable, carbon-free
power. A no-brainer if you believe in climate change. Generation 3 reactors
have been in operation for decades, proving themselves perfectly safe. Bonus -
they use nuclear waste as fuel.

~~~
thehappypm
Realistically, hydro meets your three objectives (clean, reliable, carbon-
free) with way less risk of irradiating a city or proliferating nuclear fuel
generation.

Advances in transmission line technology also enable hydro plants to be
hundreds or even thousands of miles from power consumers. There's a project
currently underway to connect a huge hydro plant in Quebec, where all the
water from the Great Lakes drains to the Atlantic, to the New England market
via a transmission line through Maine.

~~~
sunkenvicar
Hydroelectricity is cheaper than nuclear, but relatively niche. It needs a lot
of flowing water and a large change in elevation. In many places it is dead in
the water.

Compare this to nuclear, which only needs a large body of cooling water.
Saltwater or fresh water, doesn’t matter.

~~~
thehappypm
HVDC means you can literally be a thousand miles from the power plant. That's
distance from the Hoover Dam to Kansas City. There's literally nowhere in
America beyond the range of a viable hydro plant.

~~~
sunkenvicar
Strange that America isn’t pure hydro. Also strange that so many startups
ignore hydro and jump to nuclear.

------
bin0
The question is not "do they have the right", but rather should they be
prevented via the government. Seeing as a coal plant (the other likely option)
has impacts all its own, I think not. It is the lesser of two evils, if not a
perfect good.

------
idlewords
A forward-thinking Disney would buy the rights to the Simpsons and make a
(mal)functioning nuclear plant the centerpiece of Springfield, FL.

~~~
FaisalAbid
Disney owns Simpsons already!

~~~
laken
Though, they don't own theme park rights! Fox previously sold theme park
rights to Universal

------
valiant-comma
From deep in the article:

 _Even Antone, who almost filed the bill that would nix the nuclear option,
doubts that the step is necessary. His bill, he told CityLab, is aimed at
making contract arbitration binding for Reedy Creek firefighters; the nuclear
clause was likely added for leverage, he said._

------
subcosmos
Only if the fuel cooling ponds double as a "small world" boat ride.

------
ben1040
The fact that Disney controls their own governmental entity also means they
have a cheaper cost of capital for (some) improvements. RCID can sell tax
exempt bonds, which saves them money on interest.

------
poelzi
You solve all the nuclear reactor bullshit by demanding full insurance
coverage - nobody can effort this. Problem solved.

------
musicale
No, it's just a cover for their missile program.

------
olivermarks
No

~~~
olivermarks
OK I'll expand on this since it was downvoted. Legislation, however old,
allowing corporations to build nuclear power plants is a big no for me.
Imagine Amazon or Apple building their own nuclear plants...

~~~
cookingrobot
Letting them build sounds good to me. Nuclear power is safe when you want it
to be, and we need more of it.

~~~
tobib
There is still the problem of nuclear waste being highly radioactive for
thousands of years and us not knowing how to deal with it properly.

~~~
admax88q
Why do you think we don't know how to deal with it properly?

What do you think we do with our current nuclear waste? What is "improper"
about our current processes?

~~~
ionised
> Why do you think we don't know how to deal with it properly?

Is this a serious question?

We bury it underground in vast bunkers with hundreds of warnings and ominous-
looking signs inteded to warn people thousands of years into the future not to
fucking open the thing.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository)

Of course we don't know how to handle it. We basically dump nuclear waste in
glorified landfills. Look how great that turned out for our regular waste that
doesn't pose the grave threat of biological/ecological hazard.

~~~
admax88q
Yes its a serious question. Why do you consider burying it in a vast
underground bunker not a sufficient solution?

You talk as if that's obviously a bad idea but to me it seems peefe fly
reasonable. Yes there is some concern about people thousands of years from now
not understanding the warnings, but the people during right now and in the
near future due to coal and climate change seem like a bigger concern at the
moment.

