Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 18:16:04 +0000 From: Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelationsnospamail.com> Subject: Re: SaabUSA Biopower survey
Dave Hinz wrote: > On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 17:03:30 +0000, Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelationsnospamail.com> wrote: > > Dave Hinz wrote: > > > >> Nuclear is a great answer. Unfortunately, people who "feel" about > >> things rather than "think" about things, stand in the way of getting new > >> nuke plants built. > > > > The thing about nuclear in the UK that puzzles me wrt coverage in the media is > > that there's this assumption that the *government* will decide if we're to have > > new nuclear plants. > > Well, they have to approve the permit, right? Maybe I presented it poorly. The govt here is clearly pro-nuclear now but media coverage appears to assume it's their prerogative to built new nuclear stations when obviously it's actually down to the private sector. > > It ain't so. Thatcher's government privatised the electricity generating industry > > so it's entirely up to private investors to decide how to generate electricity now > > ! No amount of polticicking will change that. Either nuclear is a good investment > > or it isn't. > > Oh, the production of energy isn't done by the gummint, of course. But > they do approve new plants. Or in the case of nuke, they don't. I don't think it'll be a problem now. Assuming any companies want to build them > > Of course, the rules may be changed ! Be interesting to watch this one. > > Same goes for the USA btw. > > See above. I'm wondering if the govt won't assist by offering to cover liability issues. In any event the technology still has to be commercially viable ! Currently it seems not to be. Graham
