Chinese nuke

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 21 Oct 2013, 17:05

This guy

https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/s ... le-by-2-3-

doesn't think much of Chinese skills at running nuclear power plants. Talks about safety short-cuts.

I'm not saying he is right, I am saying that China locks down information so tight that it is impossible to say how good or bad they are.

Post by **clv101** » 21 Oct 2013, 17:56

RalphW wrote:If we start paying that price in 2023, it would require electricity prices to rise 7% more than inflation each year to bring in price parity.

I don't see this as that as unlikely price scenario... most other nuclear will be offline by then so will more coal, North Sea gas will be pretty much gone. There might even be more 'green taxes'.

What rate has electricity price risen above inflation for the last decade? I'd expect the next decade's rise to be faster.

The other issue is that if it (and others) don't get built, it's likely the UK will have prolonged blackouts which would devastate the economy. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Government take over the project if the EDF consortium did try and pull out at some point in the future.

Potemkin Villager · Post by **Potemkin Villager** » 21 Oct 2013, 18:52

clv101 wrote:
.... I wouldn't be surprised to see the Government take over the project if the EDF consortium did try and pull out at some point in the future.

The bloody French (and johnny foreigners generally) - can't trust them as far as you can throw them! Which begs the question as to why they were given the job?

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 21 Oct 2013, 18:57

'cos no British firm wanted the job.

Potemkin Villager · Post by **Potemkin Villager** » 22 Oct 2013, 10:34

woodburner wrote:'cos no British firm wanted the job.

I expect they had much better things to be doing or possibly they were not considered competent?

Whatever way you look at this it is hard to see it having any sort of happy ending as things will inevitably take longer, cost more and bi-lingual corners will be cut to try and meet financial targets....... so yes it is easy to imagine the "consortium" tiring of the never ending demands to achieve the impossible on a tight budget to suggest to their "masters" that if they are such f***ing clever dicks why don't they do it themselves........

stumuzz · Post by **stumuzz** » 22 Oct 2013, 12:10

After listening to the debates, media output on the Hinkley saga, i have come to the conclusion that the politicians are playing a huge game of pass the buck.

It seems there is a case to answer that Hinkley is receiving indirect and direct subsidies, in which case, there is a good chance that the deal will be scuppered by the EU.

If it is scuppered the politicians will be able to point the finger of scorn at Brussels and wipe their hands of it. They can then come over all Churchillian and say our backs are against the wall, we should pull together in the national interest,we will nationalise energy etc.

If they said these things now Joe public would probably say they were making it up for political advantage.

Also, it is only 24 hours since the announcement and the price has already gone from 16bn to 18bn!

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 22 Oct 2013, 14:56

Potemkin Villager wrote:
clv101 wrote:
.... I wouldn't be surprised to see the Government take over the project if the EDF consortium did try and pull out at some point in the future.
The bloody French (and johnny foreigners generally) - can't trust them as far as you can throw them! Which begs the question as to why they were given the job?

The reason why the French ended up with the job was because EdF bought out British Power - the company that generated most of Britiain's leccy. The terms and conditions of the takeover was that there was a "memorandum of understanding" that EdF would build a fleet of new, 4th generation of PWRs however, there was no firm commitment that EdF would actually do so.
Further reading:
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... 0215es.pdf executive summary
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... 910215.pdf full report

Post by **clv101** » 22 Oct 2013, 17:54

stumuzz wrote:Also, it is only 24 hours since the announcement and the price has already gone from 16bn to 18bn!

It was £14bn a few weeks ago... A few years ago it was meant to be £2bn/reactor.

Here's a very good presentation/video from our conference a few months ago:
http://glocast.com/webcasts/global_ener ... homas.html

Potemkin Villager · Post by **Potemkin Villager** » 22 Oct 2013, 19:21

raspberry-blower wrote:
Further reading:
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... 0215es.pdf executive summary
http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/upload ... 910215.pdf full report

Scanning through the summary essentially it seems that TPTB needed a lot of cash in a hurry and wanted to make it all Someone Else's Problem so decided, once again, to mortgage the future......

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 23 Oct 2013, 16:12

clv101 wrote:
stumuzz wrote:Also, it is only 24 hours since the announcement and the price has already gone from 16bn to 18bn!
It was £14bn a few weeks ago...

I happened to catch The Lunchtime Politics(?) and heard Andrew Neil joke about precisely those 3 numbers ("Well what's a couple of Billion between friends?").

I wish I knew what the Great British Public made of all this.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 24 Oct 2013, 22:30

Some numbers about the strike price number:
http://www.carboncommentary.com/2013/10 ... #more-3296

1) By 2023, when the two new nuclear plants are ready to start humming, the total UK installed capacity of renewable energy is likely to be about 35-40 gigawatts. It may actually be much more if solar PV continues to fall in price. This means that some periods during the months outside winter the UK will be oversupplied with electricity. At those times, Hinkley Point will be required to reduce production. The proposed contract seems to guarantee to pay Hinkley even when it is curtailed in this way. By 2030, it could be stopped from operating perhaps 20% of the time, raising the implied price it is paid when it is working by an equivalent percentage.

2) The headline price will also be inflated by increases in the charges imposed by National Grid to ‘balance’ the electricity network. (‘Balancing’ refers to the process by which the Grid obliges generators either to stop or to start operating in order that electricity supply precisely matches supply). These balancing charges will get larger as the percentage of non-fossil fuel power rises sharply in the next two decades. EdF appears to have obtained an escape clause which exempts it from rises in balancing and grid transmission costs.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 24 Oct 2013, 22:35

The trouble with fortune tellers is their unreliability.

Post by **clv101** » 24 Oct 2013, 23:52

At those times, Hinkley Point will be required to reduce production.

Why would it be Hinkley that has to disconnect and not the wind farms?

Potemkin Villager · Post by **Potemkin Villager** » 26 Oct 2013, 16:33

clv101 wrote:
Here's a very good presentation/video from our conference a few months ago:
http://glocast.com/webcasts/global_ener ... homas.html

Thanks Chris that cheered me up no end!

I think the only way to get it across just how f***ed up it all is would be through a cunning blend of Black Adder, Yes Prime Minister and Spitting Image. Having anything to do with the various buck passing entities involved would be enough to drive anybody to drink at the very least.