On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 02:19:17 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Al 1953 saying
something like:

I'm wondering whether I should fork out for gas central heating in my new
house. However, I wonder if elctric heating will be cheaper than gas
heating after they build the new nuclear power stations. I think that's
what happened in France, isn't it?

"Too cheap to meter", that rings a bell.


When they got past that particular barefaced lie, there was a
publicity drive stating that the prices of electricity generated from
nuclear, coal and oil were in the ratio 1:2:3.

But that was also a barefaced lie, as nuclear power in the UK has
always cost more per kWh than electricity produced commercially from
any fossil fuel.

"Peak uranium" is not far behind "peak oil", which is going to happen
within the next decade. The rush to nuclear power, the result of a
desire to lower CO2 emissions, will bring peak uranium ever closer.
Uranium prices will rocket and finding secure supplies will become
ever more difficult.

I wonder what the next "quick fix" will be after nuclear power? Tidal
power, more wind power, perhaps, but these systems don't generate
power reliably when you need them. Clean coal? The first UK clean
coal station has just been denied planning permission on the basis of
a detailed report that showed the technology did not have a cat's
chance in hell of doing what was claimed for it. Biomass? The
proposed biomass power station on Anglesey would need most of its fuel
to be imported over long distances by sea, adding CO2 emissions.

So it looks like nuclear fusion will be needed to save the day. But
it's 20-30 years away. Funnily enough, they said the same 20-30 years
ago. But 20-30 years on, it is still 20-30 years away.

Must keep trying. ;-)