Re: Nuclear back on
- From: David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:20:04 +0100
On Fri, 19 May 2006 15:04:51 +0100 someone who may be AJH
<sylva@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote this:-
The thing is a user will not be much concerned where his cheap
electricity comes from as long as he feels he has a secure contract.
Norsk Hydro probably had surplus electricity, the water had to go
through the system so the marginal cost of providing electricity for
fixing nitrogen was low.
As with aluminium plants in the UK, Norsk Hydro built their own
power stations in order to power the process.
Back to the title of the thread: if we generate a large proportion
(say >50%) of our peak electricity with nuclear power the marginal
cost of providing electricity off peak to a fuel synthesiser may be
attractive.
Only if the costs of this very expensive way of producing
electricity can be transferred away by government onto all of us.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
.
- References:
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: alexterrell
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: John Beardmore
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: David Hansen
- Re: Nuclear back on
- From: David Hansen
- Re: Nuclear back on
- Prev by Date: Re: Nuclear back on
- Next by Date: Re: Nuclear back on
- Previous by thread: Re: Nuclear back on
- Next by thread: Re: Nuclear back on
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|