tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post7281720612894985019..comments2024-03-29T11:01:01.401+00:00Comments on Capitalists@Work: Once You Have Paid The Danegeld ...CityUnslickerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15929544047783163175noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-80993580427890645362011-02-17T15:25:26.421+00:002011-02-17T15:25:26.421+00:00It is utter rubbish that the floor price is a subs...It is utter rubbish that the floor price is a subsidy for nuclear. The proposal benefits renewables or any other way of reducing emissions just as much as nuclear. The only way that it benefits any of those industries is that it makes electricity from fossil fuels more expensive. If this price floor is a subsidy for nuclear then preventing the construction of new coal-fired power plants would be a subsidy for nuclear.Peter Woodhttp://climatedilemma.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-38147624360220328622010-10-28T11:53:54.956+01:002010-10-28T11:53:54.956+01:00The current nuclear operators are looking at life-...The current nuclear operators are looking at life-extending the current PWR fleet to 60 <a href="http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2057693" rel="nofollow">or even 80 years</a> - economic even at current leccy prices. This is bad news for the western new nuclear builders, as the future hole they want to fill vanishes. This low demand will further make new nuclear uneconomic in the west.<br /><br />EDF's idea/plan to take over Areva looks to me quite likely to happen, as Areva increasingly struggles.<br /><br />Of course we in Blightly, at the behest of our wonderful nuclear lobby, went for the <i>Advanced gas-cooled reactor</i>, not the alien "American" PWR (excepting Sizewell B). The AGR's slowly cracking graphite cores make life extension beyond 40 to 50 years rather unlikely. So its wind and gas for us in the future. Nuclear dropping out will probably increase night-time wholesale prices, which should at least help wind economics a bit (and the building of more HVDC links to France!).rwendlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07861901317813829419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-16669568249216855672010-10-26T21:13:18.216+01:002010-10-26T21:13:18.216+01:00Throwing money at people to ensure there is a cont...Throwing money at people to ensure there is a continued supply is fine as long as <br /><br />1 it is offered to all suppliers - from nukes to hamster wheels<br /><br />2 it is offered on an even basis - the hamsters get the same subsidy as the wind farmers<br /><br />3 it it clear to us how much the subsidy isAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-37302254456398611842010-10-26T19:57:40.408+01:002010-10-26T19:57:40.408+01:00they detect, showing every sign of being willing t...they detect, showing every sign of being willing to throw someone else’s money at it<br /><br />Any better than Broon's mob?James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-58890960084668671042010-10-26T17:16:57.585+01:002010-10-26T17:16:57.585+01:00budgie - I agree that subsidies can be legitimate ...<b>budgie</b> - I agree that subsidies can be legitimate (ideally with a democratic mandate)<br /><br />personally I reckon hidden / undeclared subsidies are illegitimate, for starters<br /><br />but if, in full possession of the facts, you / we are willing to pay for something, so be it<br /><br />at 50% nuke, we would be paying an absolute fortune for security of supply (UKERC is not a major authority on costs, and nuke costs are always significantly understated by the only people who really know, i.e. those who want to build'em). I don't deny the utility value of electricity is enormous<br /><br />personally, I am not paranoid about security of gas supply - so we have to have a <i>modus vivendi</i> with the Russians (and the Qataris and the Algerians ...) - so what ? we will need one with the Chinese as well. That's life<br /><br />which is why I tend to favour gas (and indeed high-tech coal) over nuke - nothing doctrinal, I just hate paying more than I need toNick Drewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13670594203660051701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-79807234388201866262010-10-26T16:32:40.819+01:002010-10-26T16:32:40.819+01:00I too am dismayed by the subsidy to wind generatio...I too am dismayed by the subsidy to wind generation. Not least the fact that wind is so unreliable that there has to be backup schemes: storage; conventional generators; or power swaps. So the cost of the windmills are additional to the standard backups.<br /><br />UKERC say that the cost (I believe these leave out the wind backup costs) of one Megawatt hour is:<br />1. Offshore wind, £149.<br />2. Coal, £80<br />3. Gas, £80<br />4. Nuclear, £97<br />5. Onshore wind, £88.<br /><br />However, simply because some subsidies are bad, it is illogical to maintain that all subsidies are bad. We may choose to value a degree of electricity supply security and therefore be prepared to pay for that.<br /><br />Even at the above prices (or similar; no doubt others have other figures), it makes sense to me to have half our electricity generated by nuclear. This is because it is reliable (unlike wind), and does not require a constant supply of fuel, unlike gas and coal which may be manipulated by outside forces.Budgienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32841798.post-57610402181302488042010-10-26T09:16:32.942+01:002010-10-26T09:16:32.942+01:00with us all poorer ND. I am dismayed too at the am...with us all poorer ND. I am dismayed too at the amount being wasted on Windfarms announced yesterday, I will post later.CityUnslickerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15929544047783163175noreply@blogger.com