European Tribune

Display:
This was my result. I went for reducing demand as much as possible: the £600+ per household can be partly subsidized by the government to provide insulations for the poorest households, as (like afew argues) that would be subsidizing industry and labour.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Apr 2nd, 2006 at 04:35:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The calculator seems vapid to the point of stupidity though.

Nuclear has significant carbon costs during construction, fuelling and clean-up - unless uranium fuel is mined on-site. So pretending that nuclear is carbon-free is just plain wrong.

Renewables also have a carbon cost, for similar reasons, but obviously it's a very much smaller one.

It also would have been interesting to see what X thousand windmills or Y nuclear power stations would have meant for the UK's available development space.

And microgeneration could have had a mention too.

(And so on.)

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Apr 2nd, 2006 at 06:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
After Democracy
by marco - Dec 3
32 comments

Not quite the 'perfect fix'?
by djhabakkuk - Dec 3
2 comments

Bugger Thy Neighbour
by redstar - Dec 3
104 comments

Google Translate political bias?
by DoDo - Dec 3
6 comments

Beggar Thy Neighbour
by redstar - Dec 3
58 comments

Friedmanite Folly and the Mugabe Option
by ChrisCook - Dec 2
42 comments

On Rhetoric
by rg - Dec 3
14 comments

Obama commits to Middle East peace
by shergald - Dec 2
5 comments

Recent Diaries
Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series