sci.energy

On Sep 23, 6:28 am, "Paul F. Dietz" wrote:
> "nada" wrote in message
>
> news: @ ...
>
> > Actually one was just completed this year and that's why we say "104"
> > and not "103". Why would even ONE NPP be completed Rolf? Why? In fact,
> > the change in politics around NP is the result of many of the same
> > anti-nuclear politicians, movements, etc that have become pro-nuclear
> > under the impact of the issue of "climate change".
>
> I think the dramatic increase in the price of natural gas, as well as
> continued
> tightening of the supply of electrical generating capacity, had more to
> do with it.
>
> Paul

Paul, more ecologist side of the argument. The economic one is there
FOR the utilities, even though, in fact, NG has been stable for about
1 year, it's impossible to predict. So, yes you correct.

David