On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:58 PM, RussellMc <apptechnz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 April 2012 04:31, Denny Esterline <desterline@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't follow your math....
>>
>> 2200 MW/hr *1000kW/MW * $0.05per kW/hr * 24hr/Day *365 Day/year
>
> I knew I should have added E&OE :-)
> Factor of 24 in there :-)
>
> Your result is correct.
> But who knows the true aspects included and excluded?
> Answer: Someone does, but they are not telling me :-).
>
> As JG noted, nobody will insure a nuclear plant, the cost is
> underwritten by the associated stae in every case, so the true cost is
> never known or knowable. It is demeed a "public good"(in the most
> general sense of that term).
>
> It's Monday here :-).
>
>
>        Russell

I won't get involved in a pro/anti nuke argument, but I'm just writing
this to say that some people weigh the pros vs. cons and find nuclear
to be beneficial to our energy supply.

I see nuclear as a nice stable source of power. Accidents have
happened, yes. I doubt we really want to know how many lives have been
cut short because of burning coal (the only currently viable
alternative.)

Of course the super-solution is to use less energy combined with
building out large scale renewable sources.
-- 
Martin K.

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist