PDA

View Full Version : Cheap Nuclear Power



gerry4
16-May-11, 08:54
I thought that I would add to the debate
Firstly I thought that this would be interesting to people who say that nuclear is cheap http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13393732

Secondly, who will be paying to decommission the nuclear power stations once they are closed. No the generating companies. If that was added in then do nuclear power station would be built.

Thirdly, who will pay for the storage of the nuclear waste, again not the operating companies but the government.

If we are to have a true debate of what is the cheapest and greenest form of generating electricity then lets put the true cost into the equation.

Gerry

bekisman
16-May-11, 09:18
How the hell does France do it? produces 78.8% of it's power from nuclear - the highest percentage in the world. All this whinging about who's going to pay; "us the tax payers" who the hell do you think is paying for the subsidies (ROC's) to the windfarms eh? it's "us the taxpayers" who use electricity of course! (AND shove £136,000 a year per turbine into the landowners pockets).

It's ok with these Greens wittering on about windfarms, but less face it they were wiped from the political scene a few weeks ago..
I want to save the planet for my grandchildren - got ten of the little gits.. Let's not tinker around the edges with piddling turbines which don't work if no wind and NOT ONE SINGLE POWERSTATION HAS SHUT DOWN.

It's the consensus of even the Committee on Climate Change that nuclear is the only way.

Stop this 'fiddling' and get stuck in for a non-CO2 reliable source. Like France..

Of course the SNP is hiding it's head in the sand, and waiting for 'something better to come along' - it won't...

gerry4
16-May-11, 09:41
I have not advocated any form for electricity generation just lets get all the facts on the table and see what the TRUE cost is for each type of generation. Until that is done their can be do informed decision.

BTW in Scotland the Greens actually increased their percentage vote. They also have the same number of MSP's and before. In England they gained control of Brighton council. I am not a member of the green party. Also don't want to play who has the most grandkids as I have 8 children and step children, most producing families for their own.

Also most parties in the Holyrood election where saying they would have 100% renewable electricity by 2030 at the latest. The debate is what generated it and what is the cost of it?

Rheghead
16-May-11, 12:18
I would recommend the latest report by Mott MacDonald on the latest costs of electricity generation by different fuel sources.

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/statistics/projections/71-uk-electricity-generation-costs-update-.pdf

Currently onshore wind is the cheapest low carbon option, £5 cheaper per MWh than new build nuclear though it says nuclear should get cheaper but that will take years of maturity.

gerry4
16-May-11, 14:34
Interesting read, thanks for pointing it out.

I see on the nuclear option it says that decommissioning won't be for 100 years after it has started and so costs will not be substantial if money is put aside during that period. I find the 100 years life of the power station difficult to understand. How old are our current ones, 40 and the experts are saying they are past their sell by date?

I don't wanting to get into the safety issues, etc as that opens a whole new argument. Won't we still be dependant of external sources for the uranium to power the generators? If more countries follow the nuclear route then won't it be like oil & gas. The countries that have the uranium holding countries like ourselves to ransom? Therefore as the cost of building the reactors comes down the price of the uranium will go up.

Gerry

Rheghead
16-May-11, 14:49
I see on the nuclear option it says that decommissioning won't be for 100 years after it has started and so costs will not be substantial if money is put aside during that period.

Yes I agree with that but it requires a full change of operating financially by the utilities. It requires them to treat decomissioning and depreciation of plant infrastructure as an asset rather than a cost. Because companies are more into short term profit in the face of uncertain markets then holding onto assets for use in the future will be nye on impossible.

ducati
16-May-11, 17:18
Yes I agree with that but it requires a full change of operating financially by the utilities. It requires them to treat decomissioning and depreciation of plant infrastructure as an asset rather than a cost. Because companies are more into short term profit in the face of uncertain markets then holding onto assets for use in the future will be nye on impossible.

Really? That's the Whisky industry sunk then.:roll: