On 04/02/17 15:23, tim... wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news
On 03/02/17 22:25, Peter Parry wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 20:15:20 GMT, lid (AnthonyL)
wrote:
I know the energy densities of the fuels are massive compared to
fossil but need some help in countering the argument, with facts.
Try htps://www.withouthotair.com/about.html
The definitive book on the subject and not a drop of greenwash.
Good on energy density but doesn't account for the capital costs
These are roughly - or should be - around Β£3m /MW with a 15%
decommissioning surcharge.
O&M is probably around 7% per annum on that, and lifetime is 50 years.
You can find info about our Nucs here (yes TNP I know you know, it's for
everybody else)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclea...United_Kingdom
I didn't click on them all but of all the ones I did click on, none were
in operation for more than 40 years
that 20% difference has to be critical when amortizing such mega capital
costs
Fairly sure some AGRs are over 40 yrs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster...rating_Station
is set to do 50 years
New nuclear shouldl do even more, now teh ageing proicesses are well
understood
tim
--
It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.
Thomas Sowell