Electric central heating via radiators?

[Steve Firth]

[snip]

Ah yes, the classic of the anti-nuclear lobby "lets make up some costs".

As are the decommissioning costs of coal. And if you think that decommissioning a coal-fired station is zero-cost, zero-hazard then you need to think again.

And perhaps the government will simply take an objective look at costs.

Currently nuclear is competetive with coal, including decommissioning costs. From 2030 nuclear will be cheaper because the EU plans to impose a EUR 30 per tonne tax on carbon emissions from generating plant.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Was, Because it was never designed to produce power, only weapons grade plutonium, and decomissioning wasn't thought to be an issue.

Modern sets are way cheaper.

Total bullshit as usual.

It costs less than windpower,. About £1000-£2000 per Kwh capital costs

And thats 24x7 90% plus uptime over a 40 year plus life span. With almost zero fuel costs.

I'll do the maths for you, as I know you cant do it yourself.

Ignoring cost of capital (interest), thats a break even price of 0.63p per unit. Uranium fuel adds about another 0.1p to that. So less than

0.75p a unit.

What kills you is interest on the capital..e.g. at 5% thats 1.14p per unit more..taking you to around 3p a unit.

Usual bollox from dynamo dave.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, EDF is buying BGY, and will be running our stations and building more shortly.

All the R&D is largely done,and there are 4-5 well proven safe reliable and decomssionable designs in the world.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Quite the reverse. The CANDU reactors have the best uptime of any in the world to date.And some of the lowest costs.

depends n the oil/gas price.

You have to go deeper for the coils. below the frozen topsoil.

4:1 is typical.. thats for about 40C output temps. As you pump higher, the efficiency goes down.

yes. Air is crap when sub-zero.

Unless you are in permafrost, a few hundred meters a meter or so down will get you all the stored summer heat back in winter.

You can use water, but its a slightly different situation I didn't explore myself.

Not easily. Ice cold underfloor will just result in pools of water!

You need a warm air/cold air system plus dehumidifier when working backwards. Gets complex and expensive.

[Mark Evans]

How exactly? Water has a high SHC, considerably higher than most liquids and solids. If these radiators were filled with Ammonia, Helium or Hydrogen then this would be true :)

I'd guess that the reason for filling them with oil, rather than water, has more to do with keeping the weight of a portable heating device down than anything else.

[Doctor Drivel]

Political spite by Thatcher hating miners, eliminated the British coal industry. Middle Eastern oil was buttons to buy and the North Sea was full of cheap gas. Mrs Thatcher was told to reserve the gas for primarily domestic use and not use it to generate electricity - use the masses of coal we have under the country to generate electricity.

She never. We are now are semi-dependent on Russian gas as we used a masses of our own reserves needlessly. Russia refused to supply gas to the Ukraine a few years ago, so alarm bells rang. We need stable fuel supplies. We get oil and gas from the politically unstable Middle East and Russia - which is a political concern.

Thatcher squandered the greatest legacy this country had ever had.

Only if running low temperature UFH. Capital cost of heat pump and UFH is prohibitive. Ground source only makes it compatible with gas.

[Bruce]

Could it also be a means of avoiding internal corrosion?

[Bruce]

That's the sort of nonsense that was talked about nuclear power in the

1960s - and comprehensively disproved since.

If you really believe that nuclear electricity can be generated for 2p per unit including the construction cost (I will even allow you to ignore the much higher decommissioning cost) there will be a job for you at the very top of any of the companies that want to build nuclear power stations in Britain. You will be able to name your salary in terms of how many millions of pounds a year you would like to be paid.

Why? Because you are the only man on the planet who knows how nuclear electricity can possibly cost so little. Everyone else, including the directors of all those companies, knows that nuclear is extremely expensive and can only operate with a very heavy government subsidy, as in France and elsewhere.

You do talk such nonsense. It appears to come naturally.

[OG]

TBH it was a stupid thing for you to have said

[Doctor Drivel]

He should be.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

About 5% comes from Russia.

[Doctor Drivel]

Please eff off as you are an idiotic plantpot.

[The Natural Philosopher]

of a MODERN plant is about 5-15% of construction costs.

Not at all. Everyone knows how cheap it really is. They also know that a campaign was launched against it by people with extreme vested interests.

Originally of course, because it was being used to drive atomic weapons there was an intense interest in slagging it off by certain cold war opponents.

That is why anti-nuclear is very largely associated with the Left, and its often why nuclear is NOT cost effective, because the political restrictions imposed on it and the intense antipathy generated by it costs a lot to fight.

You don't research the facts.

[Bruce]

You take blatant propaganda at face value.

[Doctor Drivel]

Nuclear is a by-product of A bombs. It is used a front for A bomb research. Many undersea containers dumped decades ago, are starting to leak. Now the oceans and food supply chain is affected. They are a waste of time and not needed. 20% of the Irish Sea can be tidal lagoons that will supply all the UKs energy needs, even vehicles (electric).

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Do we own the supplies of this fuel?

[The Natural Philosopher]

Er, no, you do.

The actual facts on CANDU reactors around the world are fairly easy to come by.

Right now with materials and credit at a very low cost, is the ideal time to build.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, but the chief suppliers are anglophile..australia, canada, ok the african places are a bit dodgier..

And at 50 tons a year per power station, of VERY heavy material its not hard to stockpile enough for a few decades. In fairly small spaces. Obviously not refined and packed like a sardine can :-)

A lot easier than coal, oil or gas.

Which are the only other alternatives.

[george (dicegeorge)]

Nuclear may be cheap if you work out the costs of buying the stuff and building the power stations and selling it for 50 years then going bankrupt and leaving the thousands of years of waste and cancerous leaks clearups to future generations.

It's a large scale version of bunging someone a tenner to take your asbestos away on a flatbed knowing they'll chuck it over a hedge and leave it for a grown up to tidy up...

[g]

[Doctor Drivel]

Nuclear waste can be stored down disused mines after re-processing. Concrete the stuff in, in the end of the seams. A large mine will store the countries wastes for hundreds of years to come and no contamination of oceans, etc. When the seams are full, fill in the shafts.