Environment & Energy

FBaggins

(26,731 posts)

18. The prediction for gas when the plant comes online is £74

Reply to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #11)

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 12:57 PM

Oct 2013

£89.50 is "competitive" with that if you give any credit at all for the fact that it's essentially carbon free. There's also the problem that gas can't guarantee a strike price... because fuel costs are too high a proportion of their generating costs and natural gas prices can climb much faster than inflation (and has in the recent past).

If they start "fracking" and have the same level of "success" that we've seen here... that price could go way down. But it would still have a climate impact that renewables and nuclear don't share.

The strike price for "other large-scale clean energy... projects" is quite a bit higher.

The new reactors, which will cost £14bn, are due to start operating in 2023 if built on time and will run for 35 years.

Untrue. They're designed for an initial lifespan of 60 years - which could easily be extended for an additional 20. The 35 years is just the life of the strike price guarantee.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Britain to build Europe's first nuclear plant since Fukushima [View all] Eugene Oct 2013 OP

Wonderful. Cleita Oct 2013 #1

Some governments see things in perspective.. PamW Oct 2013 #2

Find another way to boil water. wundermaus Oct 2013 #3

I'll let a scientist tell you what the problem is... PamW Oct 2013 #4

And I'll Let Max Planck rebut: Demeter Oct 2013 #5

You mean we have to let a generation of environmentalists die out? PamW Oct 2013 #6

NO, I mean we have to let a generation of nuclear sell-outs die off Demeter Oct 2013 #7

Sweetheart deal on price controls FogerRox Oct 2013 #8

£92.50 is the level they've set muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #11

The prediction for gas when the plant comes online is £74 FBaggins Oct 2013 #18

That's a sweetheart deal? FBaggins Oct 2013 #19

It's a lot less than offshore wind is getting Yo_Mama Oct 2013 #22

Then the analogy doesn't hold.... PamW Oct 2013 #9

No scientist would pervert a study like you have here. kristopher Oct 2013 #10

WRONG! PamW Oct 2013 #12

The credentials required are English language comprehension caraher Oct 2013 #14

WRONG too!! PamW Oct 2013 #15

Specifically which laws of physics are being violated? caraher Oct 2013 #16

Conservation of Energy PamW Oct 2013 #17

20% is at most a rough limit with no grid upgrades and no storage caraher Oct 2013 #20

That's not "at most"... it's exactly what they're saying. FBaggins Oct 2013 #21

Try to find the 1992 National Academy Energy Study PamW Oct 2013 #24

Well said & well sourced. FogerRox Oct 2013 #26

Well said K. FogerRox Oct 2013 #27

So many assumptions... I am sad for you. wundermaus Oct 2013 #23

So is the Hindenberg PamW Oct 2013 #25

Look, the only way we can sustain modern industrial society without fossil fuels is nuclear power. hunter Oct 2013 #13