Martyn1981 wrote: »
Yep, nuclear would have been a great deployment in the 80/90's, but it seems it can't keep up with the modern world.
If French nuclear is such a great idea, then why doesn't France build it on the NW coast then sell it to us via interconnectors at market rates ....... after all, it's a great idea isn't it?
Here's the Guardian version of that story:New UK nuclear plants could be paid for upfront by consumers
GreatApe wrote: »
The state should give free heating to the people via nuclear heat for 10 years then charged at 5p a unit
Much safer than traditional electricity nuclear generation
Solves existing and future nuclear waste (you just keep it in the heating pools and it's decay heat becomes a resource for heating buildings)
Lowers electricity demand from ~335TWh towards 300TWh
Close to 100% domestic jobs and GDP (most the cost is the district heating side which are shovels and pipes) rather than importing Chinese PV panels or German wind blades. Could also innovative like micro directional drilling to lower costs of building out a district heating grid
Solves the hardest aspects of a 0% fossil word which is heating especially seasonal heating
Potential for hybrid nuclear designs like LWR followed by HWR designs to get 3x the energy output from the same fuel rods. Also 90% overall efficiency rather than 33% for nuclear electricity
Reduces consumer costs (no need to buy gas boilers or heat pumps and replace them every 10-20 years and maintain them)
Could be done in as little as 10 years (potentially as little as 5 years
If reactors are delayed could power the District heating grids via natural gas until they are ready
Could heat 95% of buildings (the very remote homes can be heated via electricity)
6-7 million homes to be built now to 2050 could direct plug into district heating saving them £5-15k on a heat pump. Existing 30 million or so gas boiler heated buildings and homes can be converted at lower cost than paying £5-£20k for a heat pump each.
ed110220 wrote: »
I'm sorry, but your proposals/forecasts etc seem to be getting more and more fanciful. First you assert that climate change will have no real net negative effects when all mainstream scientific and economic authorities have found that they will be severe.
Now you're talking of nuclear powered district heating, which I'm not aware of even being proposed seriously on a large scale from large centralised power stations, let alone installed. OK, it may work if we were to build sizeable towns from scratch next to nuclear power stations (like the Soviet Union did at Pripyat, Novovoronezh etc) but the idea that waste heat from say Hinkley Point could be practically and economically piped to and round Bristol and all the streets and gardens dug up to distribute it is a total fantasy.
ed110220 wrote: »
I'm sorry, but your proposals/forecasts etc seem to be getting more and more fanciful.
pile-o-stone wrote: »
Which is one of the reasons a lot of us have this poster on ignore.
silverwhistle wrote: »
Is that map available with any more granularity?
Account was closed due to a misreading
Grab 100+ buildings insurance quotes & cashback
Available at Tesco, Morrisons & Asda