Nuclear @ Hinckley!

Cardew

The peak load on the National Grid is on a winter evening.

At that time of the day it is absolutely certain that we will be getting nothing from solar, it is perfectly possible that we could be getting nothing generated from wind on some days; put simply, whatever their desirability they are unreliable.

Therefore to meet that peak demand we need to have generating capacity i.e. power stations. I suspect most of us would rather have 'clean' nuclear generation, than huge coal fired power stations.

However we are certain to have the 'daughters of the Greenham Common women' come to the fore; there was one on the BBC news this evening promising to do everything in her power to disrupt construction. The Security should add a few hundred million pounds to the final bill.

Anthorn

I'll put it this way: I just bought 10 chopsticks from Amazon for £2.10p

I've been watching the PM's statements on BBC News and I'm obviously missing something here: How does doubling the wholesale price of electricity benefit the consumer and lead to lower bills? I would swear blind that it would lead to price rises. But hey, what do I know?

Andy_WSM

Anthorn wrote: »

How does doubling the wholesale price of electricity benefit the consumer and lead to lower bills? I would swear blind that it would lead to price rises. But hey, what do I know?

Because the Gov are essentially admitting that they expect the current inflation busting rises to continue, so by the time the new nuke station is built the price will be "fair".

Most the population will have moved out of their houses to live in caves, but...

Richie-from-the-Boro

The real[ish] costs of green / nuclear / coal / gas ..... are here:



- we can waste 40+ bi££ion on Boris's HS2 bedroom line
- but can't find the corn money for non-carbon generation
- after the 2 [yes there are two] are built, we should
- bank the HS2 £40billion and bank 20% of the shale profits
- then build our UK owned nuclear non-carbon generation

All governments are doing nothing, £20 in every £100 is for the green levy 17% of that is for the fuel poor [good] 83% is for stupid little windy mills and other ineffective generation [bad]. At some point we need to do something and stop the hair shirt sandal wearing tree huggers sucking up what little money we have left. We as a nation are already paying two and a half times more [thee times more with offshore] than we need to turn the heating on.

Get real ........................ with energy supply, we are not Germany, we are a bankrupt nation who can't even find the dosh to build hospitals to treat our ill - we have to start somewhere and security of supply & new carbon free generation is a very good starting point.

Anthorn

Andy_WSM wrote: »

Because the Gov are essentially admitting that they expect the current inflation busting rises to continue, so by the time the new nuke station is built the price will be "fair".

Most the population will have moved out of their houses to live in caves, but...

Now I understand it. Thanks.

DragonQ

Andy_WSM wrote: »

Because the Gov are essentially admitting that they expect the current inflation busting rises to continue, so by the time the new nuke station is built the price will be "fair".

Most the population will have moved out of their houses to live in caves, but...

It is bizarre. Why not come up with a figure based on wholesale price at the time, maybe with a minimum figure? To actually set it in stone 10 years in advance is a massive gamble for everyone involved.

chris-j

ihateyes wrote: »

The 'strike price' of £92.50 per mega watt of energy price is what EDF are guaranteed to be paid.

This strike price is currently double what it is today.

If when the plant goes online the strike price is below that or falls beneath that, a levy will be placed on energy bills to pay EDF the difference.... yet another subsidy to energy companies.

The Government are as bad as the utilities!

The £92.50 per Megawatt is 9.25p per kWh.
Nobody seems to mention that currently the subsidy (or bribe) being paid to those with solar panels on their roofs is almost 15p per kWh (indexed as well) + another almost 5p per kWh if they sell energy back into the grid therefore this £92.50 seems like an absolute bargain.

Truth is successive governments are worse than the utilities and Mr Milliband himself should hold his head in shame at the costs he subjected us all to when energy minister.

apt

Cardew wrote: »

Therefore to meet that peak demand we need to have generating capacity i.e. power stations. I suspect most of us would rather have 'clean' nuclear generation, than huge coal fired power stations.
.

What is clean about Nuclear fission? There have been plenty of leaks, the waste problem hasn't been solved and uranium mining despoils the environment. It would be better to develop genuinely clean and renewable energy. Yes it will be expensive, but so is nuclear which has swallowed billions from the taxpayer and levies on electricity bills. Plus nuclear is for baseload electricity, not coping with peak demand.

Anthorn

lstar337 wrote: »

Unless you are talking about Hinkley Point 'C', In which case there will be in 10 years.

I couldn't care less about this being on my doorstep, Hinkley A & B never gave me any trouble.

Glowing in the dark will be handy during the winter.

PollySouthend

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

The real[ish] costs of green / nuclear / coal / gas ..... are here:

You talk a huge load of rubbish.

Nuclear is the most expensive form of electricity by far if you take into account the full cost of decommissioning and dealing with the waste for the amount of time it is unsafe.

Nuclear only looks good if you only look at the very short term.

Its a very selfish way to generate electric, we are going to create all this mess for the next 1000 generations to deal with.