FH is my second home
- Dec 22, 2003
Naaa although I question pervious comments in other threads by myself that stated at least an equal amount would need to be invested in renewables, etc at the same time to avoid a permanent future on nuclear but that comes as a result of the economy.Disagree. We're choosing it because it's politically expedient. We could quite easily choose a nuclear free energy solution for the future, meet our carbon targets, use existing technology, and have a similar, if not advantageous, cost base.
Indeed something I said a while ago and the drag continues.Currently in the UK we are on course for brownouts and energy rationing due to too much spend on unreliable renewables and too much foot dragging over nuclear.
Indeed it did, I left the game often collecting money only to realise a fire had then ripped through my whole city.SimCity2000. It went wrong every so often. Meh.
Yes and no, it depends on a balance plus it is now realised building them in many places just increases the problem some where else.Cost of rebuilding is normally way lower than the benefit from having it. It's why cities dont build proper flood defenses. It's cheaper to just build it all (and handy, cos re-developing cities needs doing every 50 years).