next quarterly, page-6

maan,

With regards to complaints by consumers re; higher energy costs for greener systems, it comes across as having ones cake and eating it too!
The transitional cost from nuclear to other sources of supply no doubt will have to be absorbed somewhere, irrespective of the alternative source of supply.
Lets not forget it was the people who wanted a change from nuclear.
The higher costs for greener systems can be stated in a broad manner encompassing the likes of solar,wind and fuel cells for example. Solar and wind will always fail at given points in time with fuel cells attributing constant supply with load lopping capabilities. Is it a case that in time alternative sources of supply providing load lopping features to the grid, will offset continued expense of capacity upgrades to the system?
Solar and Wind have been a contributor to the grid for some time now , with fuel cell technologies still in a state of infancy.
Questions to be asked include
1) Is equipment capable of load lopping a consideration in the grand scheme of things, in particular cost upgrades resulting from increased demand over time.

2) How will such technologies lopping characteristics affect pricing when put into use?

I know I'm not stating anything new to yourself and other posters, but given the opportunity, fuel cells contribution of constant load may bewhat makes it a winner in a greener world!



Just my thoughts