Re: oil

From: Dr. Blake Nelson (bnelson301@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Nov 27 2002 - 21:36:30 EST

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: Fwd: [ncse] UFO Group Supports Intelligent Design"

    Not to get into the details of all this, there are
    manifold things not taken into account by Glenn's dour
    attitude toward fission, including:

    1. Improvements in technology for fission reactors
    2. Economies of scale, a company like Toshiba, if it
    has a fleet of advanced boiling water reactors to
    build for a couple of companies can build them pretty
    cheap and almost cost-effective in today's cheap
    fossil fuel market,
    3. The decline of fossil fuels will make nukes more
    economically viable as the cost of fossil fuels go up
    to reflect the higher cost of fossil fuels,
    4. Governments will adopt pro-nuke policies. For
    example, in the US the biggest single inhibiting
    factor to new nukes (after the fact that fossil fuels
    are cheap and building only one nuclear plant is
    expensive) is that an unregulated (e.g., can't be
    guaranteed to get the costs of construction and
    decommissioning included in a regulated base rate)
    utility has to put up ALL the decomissioning costs up
    front. At hundreds of millions of dollars, you can't
    finance that easily, it is a deal breaker.
    5. The megawatt plant Glenn assumes is one that has
    flopped on the world market as the perfect price point
    for inefficiency. Plants will come in two varieties
    -- 1,200+ megawatt behemoths, and modular plants with
    each modular unit somewhere on the order of 100MW --
    both methods will make the plants more cost efficient
    to build, operate and maintain.
    6. Building and operating new nuke plants will
    increase GDP and make money for countless private
    businesses and the government. GDP is not a zero sum
    game.

    I can go on... if you assume the ludicrous convert
    tomorrow scenario Glenn postulates and have today's
    fixed pie to pay for it, yes, the numbers look bad.
    But what will happen is really more akin to the
    transition from coal to natural gas, and this is what
    would be happening now if it were not for the huge
    capital costs of doing a single plant, the cheapness
    of fossil fuel and the continued (albeit diminishing)
    irrational concern over nuclear plants.

    Regards,

    Blake

    --- Walter Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com> wrote:
    > Glenn,
    >
    > If you do this for fission, how much does this
    > improve?
    >
    > Walt
    >

    __________________________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
    http://mailplus.yahoo.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Nov 28 2002 - 01:42:36 EST