October 2, 2013 at 9:38 am
I am surprised that this subject has not been brought up on G.D. What are your views, or alternatives?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 21:33
Firstly we are discussing nuclear not wind. And secondly you are talking about subsidy and guarantee support. If the industries were state owned, as you appear to prefer, the taxpayer would be paying the entire bill. So I don’t follow your train of thought.
By: silver fox - 3rd October 2013 at 21:23
The taxpayer is not being asked to invest in the capital facilities at all. Which of course he would have been if these were still archaic state controlled indiustries mismnanaged, just as they always are.
Sorry but yes they are, the bloody useless windmills collect subsidy like a cleaner collects dust.
The companies looking to build new nuclear stations, wanted government money, wanted the government to guarantee any loans and wanted guaranteed prices on future energy production, now I’m sure that you know as well as I do that government money actually means taxpayer money.
Further, the mass conversion of Drax power station, currently the largest coal fired station in Europe, to bio mass for fuel, again taxpayer money is being pumped into that. Along with that there appears to be a grave reluctance from the power companies to come up with the investment needed, all the wish to do is take the profit, come on the whole fairy story behind privatisation was the need to attract investment, now the investment is needed, where is it?
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 17:16
You betcha sweet bippy you will!;)
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 16:27
I think I will “Claim the 5th” on that one Chas. 😀
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 16:21
But can you FRACK in a boat – which is what we are discussing!!:highly_amused: Answers on plain postcards, please…..
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 16:18
Oh ye of little knowledge…:highly_amused: you can also DRIFT in a boat, so it fits here perfectly.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 16:02
No doubt, Linc, but I was referring to the “drift” from fracking to………
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 15:57
Chas. Cars come and go, boats however are a totaly different kettle of fish.
You never stop working on a boat, even more so, if, as all of mine were, used at sea, they have to be better maintained than a car.You can’t just “Pull over” if you break down, take on water etc.
You don’t get too many 2nd chances at sea.
One becomes very attached to a boat.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 15:33
From fracking to crying over spilt cars and boats, eh! It’s a funny old forum, isn’t it?:D
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 15:25
Yup, I think I would feel the same if my little banger went.
I most certainly had a tear in my eyes, when due to ill health, I had to sell my last boat and watch it being taken down the road.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: Moggy C - 3rd October 2013 at 14:43
It was a very sad day, but I am more grumped by the aggro since, as the Jagdeo lost its power steering pump so Mrs P is using the Ute for commuting and I have no powered transport, other than the aircraft which is a good 25 miles distant 🙁
Moggy
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 14:11
Thanks Moggy, BUT it is from the BBC, can I take their word as verbatim?.
(P.S. You seem to be rather grumpy since the Porche went.)
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: Moggy C - 3rd October 2013 at 11:18
Perhaps we will never know the exact amount
FOI enquiry, that’s all it takes.
Meanwhile: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17546420
Moggy
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 10:48
The taxpayer is not being asked to invest in the capital facilities at all. Which of course he would have been if these were still archaic state controlled indiustries mismnanaged, just as they always are.
By: silver fox - 3rd October 2013 at 10:44
Which is why it is stupid to have core industries in foreign ownership, Water, Gas, Electricity.
Now I wonder how that situation came about? Facilities already paid for by the taxpayer, sold off to satisfy political dogma, investors and multiple bosses rake in the profits, but now when serious investment is needed the begging bowl goes out to the taxpayer again. One of the worst actions by any government of this country during peace time.
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 09:24
The words “Not to invest further in the Industry”, indicates to me they have, but not the amount. Perhaps we will never know the exact amount, but Power Stations don’t come cheap.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 09:21
Relying on “hearsay” is never “reliable”, I fear. In any case it is so easy to check facts these days. I happen to have an interest in this and so know a little about it, but if not a few minutes googling would produce the real story I am sure.
By: Moggy C - 3rd October 2013 at 09:05
True, looks like the usual garbling of the message which the internet is so good at:
Following the German government’s decision to wind down their nuclear industry having run scared after Fukashima, EON and RWE which own most of the German plants decided not to invest further in the industry
Somehow becomes
the Germans got to hear about it, complained, created such a stink, that plans were scrapped
Depressingly I see no mention in #19 of the “billions paid to the government.”
Shame 🙁
Moggy
By: Lincoln 7 - 3rd October 2013 at 08:58
The truth, or otherwise, of this somewhat unbelievable tale could easily be established by a Freedom of Information Act enquiry. Such information cannot be hidden these days by D notices and the like.
Moggy
Moggs, I think Chases reply thread 19, proves the chap I spoke to was right after all.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: charliehunt - 3rd October 2013 at 05:52
That’s not really the point. If the government through the same weight of support behind nuclear as it does behind renewables home grown suppliers might be more interested. Because the last government gave up on nuclear we lost much of our expertise anyway.