The danger of coal - need SPS

>
> But this is the dream that nuclear power advocates preached in the
50s
> and 60s. Electricity so cheap its not worth monitoring. The reality
> was that there were cost in nuclear energy that were ignored.
>
> I see no reason to believe that SPS electricty will be any cheaper
> than the present base load system. Even if it is, I see no reason
why
> an electricity cartel won't keep prices high enough for all the
> players in the game.
>

Who said SPS would be cheaper ?

Certainly not me !

Actually it depends on what you mean by "cheaper".

The price we pay for fuel and electricity ignores the enormous
military cost of safeguarding the sources of that energy.

And it also ignores the massive cost of collateral damage to the
environment, global warming, and Mercury poisining to our children,
and the huge health care cost which will result as well as reduced
life expectancy.

SPS will be more "expensive" than conventional sources in terms of
the direct retail cost to the consumer.

But SPS will be far "cheaper" in terms of dramatically reduced
collateral damage to health and the environment, and the military
cost of defending sources of energy will all but disappear.

And of course, quality of life will improve by making a more pleasant
and peaceful world - I am not sure how to measure that in terms of
cost. And I am not sure how to express the value of increased life
expectancy in terms of "cheapness".

Best regards,

Charles F. Radley