|
|
Post by wilful on Apr 30, 2012 11:03:19 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
|
Post by wilful on Apr 30, 2012 11:17:31 GMT 9.5
frankis' comments on the article are worth reading.
|
|
|
|
Post by anonposter on Apr 30, 2012 11:54:42 GMT 9.5
Never mind that his proposed alternatives either won't work or are going to be even more expensive (not to mention that the cost of Fukushima is four reactors written off which is not in the hundreds of billions of dollars).
The comments by farnkis are an interesting example of someone who knows that nuclear isn't really all that dangerous but hasn't quite comprehended that renewables are pretty close to useless and that energy efficiency improvement may make things worse (not to mention that we can't actually make big enough gains there anyway, at least not without such a drastic drop in standard of living as to cause the public to revolt).
|
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Apr 30, 2012 13:05:43 GMT 9.5
Here are some busbar LCOE estimates applicable to the USA. The code MI means an estimate made for the state of Michigan. The natgas estimates are for a CCGT using the NREL simplified LCOE calculator. VC Summer refers to the 2 Westinghouse AP1000s just starting construction in South Carolina and the estimate is in Southern Company's submission to the SC utility commission. The units are US$/MWh.
new coal ----- 133 (MI est.)
new natgas --- 084 (fuel @ US$7/MMBtu)
new NPP ------ 076 (firm est.)
new wind ----- 063 (MI contract)
new natgas --- 038 (fuel @ US$2/MMBtu)
|
|
|
|
Post by jagdish on May 2, 2012 4:30:03 GMT 9.5
|
|
