Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Sir Tigger KC on 03 July 2017, 16:48:00
-
EDF have announced today that the cost of building Hinkley point C will be £1.5 billion more than originally forcast and will now cost £19.6 billion. It will also be delayed by 15 months and they hope to finish the first reactor by the end of 2025.
In 2007 they said we'd be cooking our Christmas dinners in 2017 using electricity from Hinkley Point C! ;D
Who'd have thunk it? ::)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40479053
-
That's what you get for signing a contract in Euros ;D
-
EDF will pay the increase though, not us. They'll get it back when they shaft us with our bills when it's built.
-
Plenty of time between now and 2025 for
more cost
more time overuns.
wonder if any of us will be alive when it opens? ???
-
EDF will pay the increase though, not us. They'll get it back when they shaft us with our bills when it's built.
As far as I understand it they will charge a fixed price for the electricity, which when Dave & George signed up to it, was about double the going rate. :-\
It might turn out to be the bargain of the century when it finally starts producing electricity in 2050! :)
-
By the time it is completed the rest of the world will be using fusion reactors. :o :o :o
https://www.sciencealert.com/the-uk-has-just-switch-on-its-tokamak-nuclear-fusion-reactor (https://www.sciencealert.com/the-uk-has-just-switch-on-its-tokamak-nuclear-fusion-reactor)
-
The government (both national, regional and local) should stop faffing about and give the green light for the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project! :y
There are 5 other lagoon projects at Cardiff, Newport, Colwyn Bay, West Cumbria and Bridgwater Bay and all 6 would be cheaper to build, produce more electricity and would be operational for twice as long (with no horrendous decommissioning costs) than Hinkley Point. :y
Maybe it's all pie in the sky and I wouldn't be surprised if it decided that the birds are more important than keeping the lights on! ::) :-\ Interesting concept though and I like it! :y
http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/
-
The government (both national, regional and local) should stop faffing about and give the green light for the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon project! :y
There are 5 other lagoon projects at Cardiff, Newport, Colwyn Bay, West Cumbria and Bridgwater Bay and all 6 would be cheaper to build, produce more electricity and would be operational for twice as long (with no horrendous decommissioning costs) than Hinkley Point. :y
Maybe it's all pie in the sky and I wouldn't be surprised if it decided that the birds are more important than keeping the lights on! ::) :-\ Interesting concept though and I like it! :y
http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/
Problem is, tidal power isn't continuous - you cannot generate much/any power close to high or low tide. All the projects are in the same area (Bristol Channel/Severn Estuary) so they'll all be 'off' at similar times. Therefore you need something to supply a reliable base load otherwise you'll be in trouble when the end of Corrie/Eastenders coincides with low tide.
And even by their own figures, those 6 lagoons together only supply 8% of the UK power which is similar to what a dual reactor nuclear plant like Hinkly Pt will be.
We need to be targeting one third nuclear, one third fossil, and on third renewable for the foreseeable future. That means one new nuke every 10 years as well as things like tidal, not instead of.
-
I'm not saying they should build this instead of Hinkley but as well as. It would provide competition, so when EDF want to raise the price of the electricity from Hinkley..... ::)
Not all of the proposed tidal lagoons are in the Bristol Channel/Severn Estuary, there's on in Colwyn Bay and another near Workington in Cumbria. I'd imagine there's further potential in the Scottish lochs and The Wash. :y
However, I take your point about continuous energy, but I'm not a fan of nuclear. It's an expensive, dirty way of providing energy and when it all goes wrong.... :(
-
a few upstream dams in out of the way valleys would stop the flooding downstream, and give a constant 24/7 power supply.
-
I can't help feeling uncomfortable about something as major as a nuclear power station being controlled by a foreign entity. I get the same feeling about most essential services, a fair bit of our public transport is owned by the German national railways ( DB ). I'm sure it's all fine, but . . . . . :-\
-
I'm not saying they should build this instead of Hinkley but as well as. It would provide competition, so when EDF want to raise the price of the electricity from Hinkley..... ::)
Not all of the proposed tidal lagoons are in the Bristol Channel/Severn Estuary, there's on in Colwyn Bay and another near Workington in Cumbria. I'd imagine there's further potential in the Scottish lochs and The Wash. :y
However, I take your point about continuous energy, but I'm not a fan of nuclear. It's an expensive, dirty way of providing energy and when it all goes wrong.... :(
The electricity from Hinkley point will be cheap in comparison as from what I've read the only was that the tidal schemes will get built is by taking renewals subsidies to whole new levels of absurdity. >:( >:( >:(
-
Lets get fracking. :)
-
Lets get fracking. :)
+1 :y
-
EDF have announced today that the cost of building Hinkley point C will be £1.5 billion more than originally forcast and will now cost £19.6 billion. It will also be delayed by 15 months and they hope to finish the first reactor by the end of 2025.
In 2007 they said we'd be cooking our Christmas dinners in 2017 using electricity from Hinkley Point C! ;D
Who'd have thunk it? ::)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40479053
And all built using Chinese technology apparently. Seriously why aren't we building these things with our own government taking charge rather than these multiple sub-contractors to companies half way around the world? And why have we waited so long to build new ones?
-
EDF have announced today that the cost of building Hinkley point C will be £1.5 billion more than originally forcast and will now cost £19.6 billion. It will also be delayed by 15 months and they hope to finish the first reactor by the end of 2025.
In 2007 they said we'd be cooking our Christmas dinners in 2017 using electricity from Hinkley Point C! ;D
Who'd have thunk it? ::)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40479053
And all built using Chinese technology apparently. Seriously why aren't we building these things with our own government taking charge rather than these multiple sub-contractors to companies half way around the world? And why have we waited so long to build new ones?
Simple. The Government doesn't build, or operate nuclear (or any other form of energy) powerstations. It's core business is budget management within a democratic structure. However, it doesn't stop them from securing future energy production as part of that remit.
A French company happens to be one firm responsible for our electricity production, and they wouldn't be using a Chinese consortium to build their contribution if it wasn't commercially the best option.
The best deal isn't always the cheapest... this applies to pretty much anything to some degree. Also, the Chinese element is not to be sneered at... managing nuclear energy is a proven process which cannot be compromised, and is very different to making billions of 10p items using a black and white photocopy of an old postcard picture of something for reference and calling it done ::)
-
EDF have announced today that the cost of building Hinkley point C will be £1.5 billion more than originally forcast and will now cost £19.6 billion. It will also be delayed by 15 months and they hope to finish the first reactor by the end of 2025.
In 2007 they said we'd be cooking our Christmas dinners in 2017 using electricity from Hinkley Point C! ;D
Who'd have thunk it? ::)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40479053
And all built using Chinese technology apparently. Seriously why aren't we building these things with our own government taking charge rather than these multiple sub-contractors to companies half way around the world? And why have we waited so long to build new ones?
Simple. The Government doesn't build, or operate nuclear (or any other form of energy) powerstations. It's core business is budget management within a democratic structure. However, it doesn't stop them from securing future energy production as part of that remit.
A French company happens to be one firm responsible for our electricity production, and they wouldn't be using a Chinese consortium to build their contribution if it wasn't commercially the best option.
The best deal isn't always the cheapest... this applies to pretty much anything to some degree. Also, the Chinese element is not to be sneered at... managing nuclear energy is a proven process which cannot be compromised, and is very different to making billions of 10p items using a black and white photocopy of an old postcard picture of something for reference and calling it done ::)
Anytime they use sub-contractors/foreign firms they seem to end up way over budget and everything falls apart after 5 years. Then they charge a fortune to come and repair it everytime. Same deal with the roads, all maintenance farmed out to contractors, the roads never seem to get repaired properly; the remit of those companies seems to be very loosely worded and responsibility seems to go down a black hole.
-
It is all down to market forces in a capitalist system, and the same forces control the pricing structure and actually keep costs lower than they could be.
Other systems have been tried, like state controlled Soviet industry, and that proved to be a very inefficient, lack of options, expensive, unimaginative and totally uncompetitive road to failure. ;)