Siso

They are paying now though!

We could go back to the old saying, fusion has been 20 years away for the last 50 years

They have plenty of offshore wind turbines and is a smaller country so don't need the 1000'a of km of transmission to be built. They are also interconnected to France and Norway, but still want to build their own NPPs

And yet the UK are going to build more NPPs. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/biggest-expansion-of-nuclear-power-for-70-years-to-create-jobs-reduce-bills-and-strengthen-britains-energy-security

So you are saying any extra heat the nuclear plant puts out against coal and gas is worse than the green house warming the emiisions from coal and gas? Can't see that mentioned in the article.

Just expanding the information you put out there.

Gen 3 reactors have a large tank of water to cool an over heating reactor just sitting there, in the very rare case it may overheat. (passive cooling) Coal also needs water for dust suppression in mines and crushing plants. Cooling can be done with sea water if available. France did have trouble once in 2022. It is only a matter of using larger heat exchangers. They still abate more CO2 then any other technology for the footprint and possibly cost. The countries that are doing the best in this regards are France and Sweden. Denmark have been trying to do it for 50 years and still have a coal fired power station See https://app.electricitymaps.com/zone/FR/72h/hourly. A bit of interesting reading here for people who think it is windy somewhere https://wattclarity.com.au/articles/2024/06/13june-lowwind/ There was a roughly 3 month wind lull in April , May and June last year. https://wattclarity.com.au/market-operations/eventful-days/2024-q2-wind-lull/

Pumped hydro doesn't generate power, it stores it from somewhere else. Hydrogen needs to compressed a great deal and refrigerated to liquify it for good storage which loses more efficiency. Solar has less than 30% capacity factor.

Nuclear power uses about the same amount of water as coal. It also gives emission free water desalination when needed. Just making the point they don't need anymore cooling than other technologies.

Nuclear power stations don't put out anywhere near the heat than the CO2 they displace from coal or gas stations.

You don't get a bill every 3 months for your car. Once you have a car you don't need to worry about it again until you buy another car. Nothing like buying a car really! I have better things to do then look at previous bills as with pretty well everyone else I know.

I was being a bit tongue in cheek regarding the whole economist and a lawyer thing but even what you have gone through should not be necessary. It is a necessity and not all people are that computer illiterate. If I need to look at a page on the internet I start thinking about other stuff. It is a joke! The lesser educated people are the ones that are going to suffer the most. A lot of people aren't home to use there solar if they have it.

It's cheaper remember, about $275 a year.

It would be nice if you didn't need to be a lawyer or economist to get cheap affordable electricity. It is a necessity, not just a nice to have. Not everyone can or wants to decipher data, especially it seems if you are more of a hands-on type person.

Sorry, I thought you said you pay a couple of extra cents. Still kinds of misleads the general public. I had a friend say the Adelaide City Council only uses renewable energy which is not right obviously to some of us but not to the non engineering background people. There is at least 2 gas turbines running continuously in Adelaide directed by AEMO for grid stability so ACC will be getting some of that. ACC purchase some of there energy from a solar farm near Streaky bay on the west coast of the state about 500 km away in a straight line so really they would not be using any of the energy from there. I feel it is misleading and hides how hard the renewable grid is going to be. It also does a dis-service to the rural towns who host these facilities. Does this mean they only use the fossil fueled part of the grid. The ACT do the same thing but are close to the grid stabilising coal plants in NSW. When they say SA got 85% of there power from renewable, I wander if that is minus the stuff the ACT claim from the Hornesdale wind farm or is it double dipped. There is no Wind turbines even visible from Adelaide because it will ruin the view.