Soaring costs threaten Britain’s nuclear plans

Source: The Times of London

Energy policy hanging by thread after only credible company left to build nuclear reactors raises price by 40 per cent to £7 billion each

<snip>

Read more: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article3406852.ece

The article is behind a pay-wall, that headline and first sentence are on the front page of The Time website http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/ under the Busiress section.

It's also the first item in a Reuters list of top news stories today:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/05/07/press-digest-british-business-may-idUKL5E8G6A1H20120507

PRESS DIGEST - British business - May 7

Mon May 7, 2012 1:01am BST

The Times

SOARING COSTS THREATEN TO BLOW NUCLEAR PLAN APART

Energy policy is hanging by a thread after the only credible company left to build nuclear reactors in Britain increased the price by 40 percent to 7 billion pound ($11.31 billion) each.

<snip list of unrelated stories>

6 replies, 1385 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

6 replies	Author	Time	Post
Soaring costs threaten Britain’s nuclear plans (Original post)	bananas	May 2012	OP
$11.3B out the gate...	kristopher	May 2012	#1
wind and efficiency are vastly cheaper.	diane in sf	May 2012	#2
In every way.	Zoeisright	May 2012	#3
Yes they are.	kristopher	May 2012	#4
Even GE Says So	AndyTiedye	May 2012	#5
And Britain is well-suited to offshore turbine development as well. nt	NickB79	May 2012	#6

Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun May 6, 2012, 10:28 PM

kristopher (21,243 posts)

1. $11.3B out the gate...

How much do you suppose the price will go up once the UK has spent the first $5B and can no longer afford to back out of the deal?

Reply to this post

Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun May 6, 2012, 11:47 PM

diane in sf (2,837 posts)

2. wind and efficiency are vastly cheaper.

Reply to this post

Response to diane in sf (Reply #2)

Mon May 7, 2012, 01:04 AM

Zoeisright (7,797 posts)

3. In every way.

No poisons that last for hundreds of thousands of years to store and try to keep under wraps and under control. No prohibitively expensive maintenance and upkeep. No cancers, birth defects, and poisoned earth. Not to mention money.

Reply to this post

Response to diane in sf (Reply #2)

Mon May 7, 2012, 03:34 AM

kristopher (21,243 posts)

4. Yes they are.

On the Horizon: Deeper Wind, Faster Solar
By Steve Leone, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
April 24, 2012

New Hampshire, USA -- Offshore wind technology is striving to reach new depths while the solar industry is facing a challenge to make rooftop installation easier than ever. Both announcements this week are structured to clear some of the fundamental hurdles facing the wind and the solar industries.

Ahead of an international clean energy conference this week in London, the U.K.’s Department of Energy and Climate Change said it is working with the U.S. Department of Energy on a plan to develop floating wind technology that will give turbines access to the strong, consistent resources currently out of reach of current wind farms.

On Tuesday, the DOE announced that it is making $5 million available this year toward the development of “plug-and-play” solar rooftop installations with the guiding principle that a system should be purchased, installed and made operational in one day....

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/04/on-the-horizon-deeper-wind-faster-solar?cmpid=WindNL-Thursday-May3-2012

Soaring costs threaten Britain’s nuclear plans

1. $11.3B out the gate...

2. wind and efficiency are vastly cheaper.

3. In every way.

4. Yes they are.

5. Even GE Says So

6. And Britain is well-suited to offshore turbine development as well. nt