On 24/07/2017 16:09, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:50:05 +0100, Mark
wrote:

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:18:56 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote :
20 million households makes that £20bn spent every 5 years on
batteries and inverters.

Makes Hinkley point look cheap.

Only because Hinkley is the cheapest and truly greenest option.

You know for sure how much it will cost then? Have you passed this on to
the builders?

Have they factored in the decommissioning costs?

Standard practice these days is to include an amount for
decommissioning. Of course, Harry will say it's drivel, because no-one
knows how much it'll cost, regardless of the fact that a pretty good
estimate can be made from what is already known.

What about all the low and high level nuclear waste? How will they
assess the effect of that when it's dug up by our descendants who have
regressed to mediaevalism (or earlier)?

--
Max Demian