25-05-2003 00:06									#241
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by DanS Edit: On North Korea, he has successfully realigned US and Japanese interests on the issue, and gone a long way to doing so with South Korea and China. This administration has been busy!

I'm not denying they have been busy, just saying there are constraints to what they can do. I think you know just as well as I do that the White House would prefer to bomb their nuclear facilities to rubble.

	25-05-2003 00:58									#242
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Don't be angry at me Dan.

	25-05-2003 07:18									#244
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

A random question on another subject entirely... Now that interest rates are about 1% off of post-war lows (at least in the States), wouldn't it make sense for us to look at new nuclear power projects?

	25-05-2003 07:23									#245
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

How is one connected to the other?

	25-05-2003 07:32									#246
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The majority of nuke costs are in the initial construction, while the majority of both coal and natural gas costs are in the fuel (natural gas bearing the least on the initial construction). Because of this fact, the cost per kwh of nuke power and its relative attractiveness versus coal and natural gas is heavily dependent on interest rates.

Another question is why Japan, who has such low interest rates, doesn't have a higher proportion of nuke use (~30% of generation, IIRC).

Last edited by DanS on 25-05-2003 at 07:42

	25-05-2003 07:50									#247
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Interesting, hadn't thought of that. But debts can also be made because of restocking, replacing/modernising equipment or expanding generation capacity. (though I wouldn't know whether that outweighs debt on initial investment)
And when it concerns costs on fuel, solar, wind or hydro seem just as interesting. Or even fuel cells.

	25-05-2003 07:52									#248
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by DanS Another question is why Japan, who has such low interest rates, doesn't have a higher proportion of nuke use (~30% of generation, IIRC).

Damn you.

IIRC they've been expanding their nuke capacity lately. (lemme see if I can find anything on that)

	25-05-2003 07:54									#249
	Put an end to popups!

Solar and wind are very expensive nowadays, even though the costs have been falling quite a lot. The load for nuke power plants could probably be increased (reducing the costs per kwh) by using them to generate hydrogen for fuel cells. 15-25 year time-frame.

	25-05-2003 08:02									#250
	Tired of ads?

From the archive of the Economist:
ELECTRICITY GENERATION  

Despite the fuss over global warming and excitement over renewable energy, developed countries are still relying heavily on fossil fuels to produce electricity, according to a new report by the OECD. There has been a steady growth in the use of wind and solar energy, but renewables accounted for only 2% of total electricity production in rich countries in 1997. In contrast, fossil fuels—coal, oil and gas—still accounted for 60% of electricity generation in 1997, as they had done a decade earlier. The debate about phasing out nuclear power, which is particularly heated in Germany, comes on the heels of a dramatic rise in its use. The rise in nuclear electricity in the ten years to 1997 was led by Japan, where it grew by 70% in kW-hour terms, France (50%) and America (40%).

And now I'm going to bed, hopefully I'll be able to say something sensible tomorrow.

	25-05-2003 08:07									#251
	Inflate your Upload Space

Hmm... The US. The common rhetoric suggests that we haven't built a new plant since the early 70s. Wonder why the factual disconnect.

	25-05-2003 22:43									#252
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by DanS Solar and wind are very expensive nowadays, even though the costs have been falling quite a lot.

True, solar and wind are usually still more expensive than fossil fuels, but according to your reasoning their rendability should increase in the same proportion as nuclear, if not more.
One big advantage of wind and solar is that you can invest on a very small scale, you don't lose too much scale of economy by installing a single solar panel.
Banks aren't very willing to finance nuclear plants since even small ones entail a very large generation capacity. And also because have to deal with insurance against accidents and waste reprocessing. (if a blade falls of a wind turbine, it's not likely to kill anyone )

Those are my thoughts at least, maybe you should ask someone like MtG after his opinion.

quote: The load for nuke power plants could probably be increased (reducing the costs per kwh) by using them to generate hydrogen for fuel cells. 15-25 year time-frame

How so?

quote: Hmm... The US. The common rhetoric suggests that we haven't built a new plant since the early 70s. Wonder why the factual disconnect.

Maybe total generation increased because they've expanded capacity at existing plants?

	25-05-2003 22:59									#253
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I know we need some more plants in California, but from what I hear they aren't being built as fast as they should be, even with the low interest rates.

	26-05-2003 08:32									#254
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by DanS A random question on another subject entirely... Now that interest rates are about 1% off of post-war lows (at least in the States), wouldn't it make sense for us to look at new nuclear power projects?

MtG can elaborate I'm sure, but the higher costs of Nuke are probably some in construction (where debt would factor) but moreso in ongoing maintenance - so it may not be affected as much by lower rates.

	27-05-2003 23:57									#255
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

IIRC, the hidden cost of our own Ignalina nuc plant is in the fact that we accumulated the sinking fund for its decommissioning for only about the last 5-7 years, while it operated for over 20 now.

How is it elsewhere? How is the future need for decommisioning/refurbishment dealt with?

	29-05-2003 22:29									#256
	Remove this text

How is the future need for decommisioning/refurbishment dealt with?

Saras: Same in the US, I believe. A sinking fund is set up (by law) for decommissioning/refurbishment, payable over the expected life of the plant. I guess that somewhat offsets the benefits of a low interest rate environment. Don't know if payments are adjusted in an underfunded or overfunded situation.

but moreso in ongoing maintenance

Super Sten: I believe that maintenance would go under operating costs. Attached is a graphic for the relative costs per kwh of nuclear power versus others, given a 5% interest rate, 30 year plant life, 70% load.

Attachment: electcost90.gif
This has been downloaded 80 time(s).

Last edited by DanS on 29-05-2003 at 22:36

	29-05-2003 22:33									#257
	Support Apolyton

Interesting revision upward of Q1 '02 GDP by 0.3 percentage points to 1.9%. Both a good and bad situation to be in, since we're still losing a small number of jobs.

Hope Sten can start doing the big cha-ching soon!

	29-05-2003 22:34									#258
	Put an end to popups!

quote: I know we need some more plants in California, but from what I hear they aren't being built as fast as they should be, even with the low interest rates.

Recall Davis!!!

Why don't we have more of those plants that harness energy from waves?

Also, I remember sometime ago I read that someone was coming up with a device that could absorb heat and harness the energy through harmonic vibrations... What's up with that?

I say that everyone needs to keep their hands off Cali right now, as far as our energy crisis is going (like GW said sometime ago). Yeah, there has been a lot of underhanded moves by outside energy suppliers, but there has also been alot of BS happening within our own state that we need to take care of.

	29-05-2003 22:53									#259
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by DanS Interesting revision upward of Q1 '02 GDP by 0.3 percentage points to 1.9%. Both a good and bad situation to be in, since we're still losing a small number of jobs. Hope Sten can start doing the big cha-ching soon!

Some say that the economy has to grow by 4% to create jobs. Damn, that's a lot.

	29-05-2003 22:59									#260
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Japher I say that everyone needs to keep their hands off Cali right now, as far as our energy crisis is going (like GW said sometime ago). Yeah, there has been a lot of underhanded moves by outside energy suppliers, but there has also been alot of BS happening within our own state that we need to take care of.

He's just mad because we didn't vote for him.

	29-05-2003 23:04									#261
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Or that all of the law suits from California are headed to Texas

	29-05-2003 23:05									#262
	Support Apolyton

hey, Kidicious, I grew up in Fresno... sweet

	29-05-2003 23:07									#263
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Japher Or that all of the law suits from California are headed to Texas

Hehe... true.

	29-05-2003 23:09									#264
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Japher hey, Kidicious, I grew up in Fresno... sweet

Cool, everyone gives me crap for my location. Your the first one to appreciate it .

	29-05-2003 23:11									#265
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I was there last weekend. I want to move back one day, maybe up into the hills though.

	29-05-2003 23:14									#266
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Japher I was there last weekend. I want to move back one day, maybe up into the hills though.

I like Mariposa.

	02-06-2003 19:08									#267
	Put an end to popups!

Another question that I have regarding the relative attractiveness of some assets in a low interest rate environment...

Wouldn't it make sense that adding skyscraper space would be more attractive in a low interest rate environment? The price of land goes up as the interest rates go down, but the price of steel doesn't.

	02-06-2003 19:45									#268
	Remove this text

Assuming skycrapers are built out of a pure economic rationale. Remember we discussed the economic sensibility of skycrapers a while ago and we couldn't draw any conclusions.
In that sense they're like Nuclear power plants IMHO, not just built with a simple cost/benefits calculation in mind, but also out of prestige.

Last edited by Colon on 02-06-2003 at 20:45

	02-06-2003 20:40									#269
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Assuming skycrapers are built with out of a pure economic rationale.

True. True. But Sten also made the comment that skyscrapers aren't that economical anymore. So I'm looking to see what would make them more economical.

My condo is worth more than the current skyscraper build price that we figured out of $225/ft^2 (real estate inclusive), indicating that it would be more economical to build up, if the zoning regulations permitted it.

	06-06-2003 02:16									#270
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Here's an article on the relative merits of the Fed v. ECB policies that mentions the Taylor rule. Colon should like that!

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...p=1012571727092

Interestingly, Taylor will be cutting his teeth on Iraq's economy. Most of the macroeconomist type work is being done under his office, IIRC.