On 30/10/16 09:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
Judging by several radio and tv documentaries recently, the government needs
to actually allow renewable the same terms as Nuclear has been given or
nobody is going to invest in tidal schemes or any new ventures or even
storage development.

WEll that is a desirable outcome. Investment in tidal/renewable/batty
pixie dust storage is a waste of our money.

Renwable already gets MOTE than nuclear does.

One cannot surely have one law for one and another for the rest. It will
end in undercapacity and we will miss our carbon reduction targets by miles
and have to buy in expensive power from what will be, by then outside of our
borders ie the eu.


All the government has to do is get the hell out of the industry, or at
least stop wasting money on subsisdising lost causes.

There seems to be a lot of fuzzy thinking going on in the energy department.

You can say that again.

yes it is going to cost more as this subsidy will in the end, end but
really, in order to keep energy security, we now have to build more tidal
and other renewable systems, as often they can bebrought on line faster than
Nuclear or most other carbon generating gas systems.
Brian

No, we should not build a single renewable energy system ever again,
with public money.

20 nuclear power stations, maybe.

--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp