On Jun 7, 7:37*pm, Nightjar wrote:
On 07/06/2013 18:16, harry wrote:









On Jun 7, 5:18 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 07/06/13 06:47, harry wrote: On Jun 6, 11:39 pm, The Other Mike
wrote:

Or, to put it another way, GBP 1.63, or about what those in poverty have to pay
to you for three units of your massively subsidised licence to print money
daytime only intermittent non dispatchable electricity

--
And you think new nuclear will be *any cheaper?
You need your head examining.

No, I dont think, I KNOW.

You know nothing of the sort.
http://www.theecologist.org/News/new...renewable_revo...

Quite misleading, but that is true of many of the sources you quote.

That article calculates the future need for nuclear plants on the basis
of the current output of 440 operational reactors, completely ignoring
the fact that only about 150 of those have outputs in excess of 1,000
MW, while a single modern station could have an output of nearly 6,000 MW..

Colin Bignell

Still a lot of reactors.
Largely untried technology too.