|
LA Blackout | by VivianC | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
A non-biased question | by Kickstart | 2005-09-12 13:41:03 |
|
Can't give a non-biased answer. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 13:59:00 |
| What's needed is a *new* energy producer. |
by kahuana |
2005-09-12 14:04:39 |
The incumbent producers have no incentive to increase their production capacity.
Increased capacity requires capital expense and reduces their revenues.
Increased capacity reduces the "unit" price they can charge which reduces their "per-unit" profit.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
The cost of entry is very high. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:07:55 |
|
Uh, why reactors? | by mortaine | 2005-09-12 14:12:51 |
|
Plus, reactor fuel has doubled in cost | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:16:44 |
|
It earned itself back over 10 years. | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:20:31 |
|
Reactors ARE safe, cheap and environmentally sound | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 14:17:01 |
|
Storage isn't a problem. In 40-50 years | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:18:22 |
|
Chernobyl, Three Mile Island | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:19:38 |
|
Chernobyl and Three Mile Island | by Pic | 2005-09-12 14:21:50 |
|
There's no real way of telling that | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:23:15 |
|
Chernobyl was human error. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:26:17 |
|
They did? I'd say "Darwin Award", but unfortunatel | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:27:45 |
|
Not entirely | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:30:02 |
|
RetiQlum2's found links regarding Chernobyl. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:34:36 |
|
See here | by Arachnid | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Chernobyl failed because... | by RetiQlum2 | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Not really, | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:00:16 |
|
Windscale... | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Huh, I'd never heard of that one. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:04:06 |
|
It since got renamed to Sellafield. | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Or | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
TMI was a non-event | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:05:35 |
|
NIMBY applies to wind power, too. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:19:46 |
|
Solar? | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:25:28 |
|
Up here of course there's no way. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:38:58 |
|
Solar B&B | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:02:41 |
|
Every power source has its drawbacks | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 14:55:19 |
|
Hydro dams. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:56:51 |
|
Drawback | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:04:26 |
|
That's true, however | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:07:14 |
|
well, ecept for the clyde village anyway | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:19:58 |
|
James Bay hydroelectric project in Quebec | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 15:10:16 |
|
Just ask the residents of the Grand Canyon | by altordwm | 2005-09-12 15:06:27 |
|
Cost, Build time, Worker deaths, breaches, | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 15:08:08 |
|
Beleive me, the random ground shaking here is | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:21:58 |
|
They cause the destruction of the river ecology. | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 16:35:32 |
|
Entry cost is prohibitively high. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:14:26 |
|
The UF Power Plant | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:21:40 |
|
If your *cooling towers* are glowing, | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:28:17 |
|
Let me guess... | by LionsPhil | 2005-09-12 15:28:52 |
|
Oh no, quite the opposite. ;) (n/t) | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 16:15:06 |
|
The secret to wealth in this country has been... | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:09:21 |
