The problem was the availability of wear and tear parts are no longer available but South Korea have the exact same plant name KORI 1, the memorandum signed by their president was definitely not to see if it's feasible to run it again with the same parts but how will they transform it to the plant they have. easily commissioned with 5 yrs time.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
The nuclear industry has been in decline in the USA for decades. Despite the country being one of the first nations to generate nuclear energy for commercial civilian purposes, there have been few developments since the late 1970s. For instance, since 1978, only two nuclear power plants have started construction, and that only occurred in 2013. This industry has stalled because of various broad challenges related to economics, regulatory frameworks, and technological problems, as well as declining respect within the public sphere. Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste, which in the US is mostly stored in tanks at sites owned by the Department of Energy
The industry was also fatally wounded by the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979, which caused new regulatory delays to the 51 new reactors that were under construction at the time. With the introduction of new safety procedures and back-fit requirements, the speed of construction was slowed down, and the costs skyrocketed for many reactors. After that, many contracts were canceled and the industry ground to a halt.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
I think it's about time to consider nuclear energy, because it's cheaper to operate and power rate will go down. It's cleaner to produce compare to orher sources like coal.
You are dead wrong. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
It is costlier to build a fit to size machine to the old structure than start everything from new. There are already off the shelve mini reactors already
di naman politician nag build ng nuclear powerplant na yan, nakailang safety review na yan, ilang bagyo na dumaan since 1986 di naman binaha yan, pag bulkan problema ng iba pwede naman mag emergency shutdown para wala problema kaya nga may safety procedure, isa pa yung design ng bnpp ay based on lesson after ng fukushima at chernobyl incident.
Dr. Carlos Arcilla which is the head PNRI support the feasibility study for BNPP, he's literally a scientist in nuclear aspect. our energy mix now includes nuclear, with or without BNPP we will have nuclear power in 20 yrs time just accelerating it with BNPP.
If you want nuclear plant - put up one in your area - leave BNPP alone. Kaya hindi nagamit yan kase maraming defects, bagsak sya sa inspection kaya natalo ang Westinghouse sa kaso at nagbayad sila sa Pinas ng damages. Renewable energy sources are still the best.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Bakit kasi ang daming kontra bida basta sa Nuclear Power, kung pinagana lang ang 600 MW na Philippine Nuclear Plant #01 at by 1989 nasimulan narin gawin ang kasunod na sister plant nito sa Bataan dapat mayruon na ang bansa na at least 2 to 4 nuclear power plants na operations, napakalaki na sana ang naitulong nito sa economy ng bansa lalo na sa price ng kuryente! Puro nalang kasi pananakot sa taong bayan gawa ng mga ilang grupo at mga negosyante na my vested interest sa pag distribute at produce ng kuryente sa bansa ayaw nilang mawala sa fossil fuel lalo na coal at bunker fuel (oil) powered na generating plants kasi duon sila kumikita ng limpaklimpak!
By example Cong. Cojuangco, I challenged you to live by example within the perimeter of the nuclear plant with your entire Family, including your mother and father. With all due respect
maybe it’s harder to convince older people about nuclear power plants because they’re the ones who remember what happened when Chernobyl blew up? I don’t know. maybe that’s also why they stopped working on this power plant in the 1980s. 🤷🏻♀️ but I do agree that nuclear is cleaner than coal. but not cleaner than solar or wind. nuclear will hurt the Bataan land and dump nuclear waste in the water
naalala ko noon ayaw ng mga tao na paganahin ang BNPP especially yung mga malapit sa planta dahil sariwa pa ang takot ng mga tao sa nagyari sa Chernobyl. Kahit na laganap noon ang blackout everytime na pinagiisipan na paganahin yan marami ang tumututol, marami ang nag rarally. Yung gobyerno naman sa tingin ko ayaw nila ma sisi kung sakalin pumalpak ang planta. Ang dapat ginawa noon nag hire ng mga expert para masuri ng husto kung safe ba talaga paganahin at di umasa sa mga sabi sabi at pulitikal na dahilan.
bili na lang ng bago congressman kesa sa irestore pa yang oldmodel na bnpp, dahil mas magastos na at mas matagal pa bago natin yan magamit kesa sa bumili na lang ng new model na mas safe at mas mura na, mas maaga pa tayo makakagamit ng nuclear energy..
Im for Nuclear Power Plant, but you need to check the status ng kapaligiran. May mga underwater faultline around the area. Consult the public about it then balansehin po sana ang kontribution nito sa Energy Requirement needed ng ating bansa. Kung ang 25,000 mega watt ay kailangan pero nasa 300 megatwatt lang at present at naka design sya sa 600 plus. still malayo pa tayo sa 10 percent. If the Government can lower 3 pesos per kilowat all over the country, then go for it. if not. hanap nalang ng pedeng mailipat sya somewhere safer.
The nuclear industry has been in decline in the USA for decades. Despite the country being one of the first nations to generate nuclear energy for commercial civilian purposes, there have been few developments since the late 1970s. For instance, since 1978, only two nuclear power plants have started construction, and that only occurred in 2013. This industry has stalled because of various broad challenges related to economics, regulatory frameworks, and technological problems, as well as declining respect within the public sphere. Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste, which in the US is mostly stored in tanks at sites owned by the Department of Energy
The industry was also fatally wounded by the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979, which caused new regulatory delays to the 51 new reactors that were under construction at the time. With the introduction of new safety procedures and back-fit requirements, the speed of construction was slowed down, and the costs skyrocketed for many reactors. After that, many contracts were canceled and the industry ground to a halt.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’ Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange. If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price. This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
This plant must be commissioned ASAP!
The problem was the availability of wear and tear parts are no longer available but South Korea have the exact same plant name KORI 1, the memorandum signed by their president was definitely not to see if it's feasible to run it again with the same parts but how will they transform it to the plant they have. easily commissioned with 5 yrs time.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
The nuclear industry has been in decline in the USA for decades. Despite the country being one of the first nations to generate nuclear energy for commercial civilian purposes, there have been few developments since the late 1970s. For instance, since 1978, only two nuclear power plants have started construction, and that only occurred in 2013.
This industry has stalled because of various broad challenges related to economics, regulatory frameworks, and technological problems, as well as declining respect within the public sphere.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste, which in the US is mostly stored in tanks at sites owned by the Department of Energy
The industry was also fatally wounded by the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979, which caused new regulatory delays to the 51 new reactors that were under construction at the time. With the introduction of new safety procedures and back-fit requirements, the speed of construction was slowed down, and the costs skyrocketed for many reactors. After that, many contracts were canceled and the industry ground to a halt.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
good luck...PH-SOKOR...god be with us...god bless us.....🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀🍀
I think it's about time to consider nuclear energy, because it's cheaper to operate and power rate will go down. It's cleaner to produce compare to orher sources like coal.
You are dead wrong. Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
It is costlier to build a fit to size machine to the old structure than start everything from new. There are already off the shelve mini reactors already
Believing in politician with regards to nuclear engineering is stupid!
They are setting up for dissapointment.
so we should belive you?
di naman politician nag build ng nuclear powerplant na yan, nakailang safety review na yan, ilang bagyo na dumaan since 1986 di naman binaha yan, pag bulkan problema ng iba pwede naman mag emergency shutdown para wala problema kaya nga may safety procedure, isa pa yung design ng bnpp ay based on lesson after ng fukushima at chernobyl incident.
Dr. Carlos Arcilla which is the head PNRI support the feasibility study for BNPP, he's literally a scientist in nuclear aspect. our energy mix now includes nuclear, with or without BNPP we will have nuclear power in 20 yrs time just accelerating it with BNPP.
Stupid? Musta naman yung ibang bansa? Stupid pala ha huling huli na tayo, katangahan mo
If you want nuclear plant - put up one in your area - leave BNPP alone. Kaya hindi nagamit yan kase maraming defects, bagsak sya sa inspection kaya natalo ang Westinghouse sa kaso at nagbayad sila sa Pinas ng damages. Renewable energy sources are still the best.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Puro takot kasi pero hindi takot sa kahirapan at mahal ng kuryente, mas maraming namamatay sa kahirapan dahil marami side effects 😢
Bakit kasi ang daming kontra bida basta sa Nuclear Power, kung pinagana lang ang 600 MW na Philippine Nuclear Plant #01 at by 1989 nasimulan narin gawin ang kasunod na sister plant nito sa Bataan dapat mayruon na ang bansa na at least 2 to 4 nuclear power plants na operations, napakalaki na sana ang naitulong nito sa economy ng bansa lalo na sa price ng kuryente!
Puro nalang kasi pananakot sa taong bayan gawa ng mga ilang grupo at mga negosyante na my vested interest sa pag distribute at produce ng kuryente sa bansa ayaw nilang mawala sa fossil fuel lalo na coal at bunker fuel (oil) powered na generating plants kasi duon sila kumikita ng limpaklimpak!
JUST remember the sarcapaghus and NSC in Ukraine brother 😮😮😮
By example Cong. Cojuangco, I challenged you to live by example within the perimeter of the nuclear plant with your entire Family, including your mother and father. With all due respect
maybe it’s harder to convince older people about nuclear power plants because they’re the ones who remember what happened when Chernobyl blew up? I don’t know. maybe that’s also why they stopped working on this power plant in the 1980s. 🤷🏻♀️
but I do agree that nuclear is cleaner than coal. but not cleaner than solar or wind. nuclear will hurt the Bataan land and dump nuclear waste in the water
naalala ko noon ayaw ng mga tao na paganahin ang BNPP especially yung mga malapit sa planta dahil sariwa pa ang takot ng mga tao sa nagyari sa Chernobyl. Kahit na laganap noon ang blackout everytime na pinagiisipan na paganahin yan marami ang tumututol, marami ang nag rarally. Yung gobyerno naman sa tingin ko ayaw nila ma sisi kung sakalin pumalpak ang planta. Ang dapat ginawa noon nag hire ng mga expert para masuri ng husto kung safe ba talaga paganahin at di umasa sa mga sabi sabi at pulitikal na dahilan.
Good power options
Good
Nuclear cleanses corruption
BNPP PAANDARIN NA YAN PARA SA MURANG KURYENTE.. GOBYERNO MAGPAPATAKBO..
🇵🇭❤️✌️........
bili na lang ng bago congressman kesa sa irestore pa yang oldmodel na bnpp, dahil mas magastos na at mas matagal pa bago natin yan magamit kesa sa bumili na lang ng new model na mas safe at mas mura na, mas maaga pa tayo makakagamit ng nuclear energy..
JUST remember Dali and Francis Scott key bridge in Baltimore Maryland mate 😅😅😅
What Chinese?
JUST remember it !😅😅
👌
Just remember Chernobyl and Fukushima mate 😮😮
Im for Nuclear Power Plant, but you need to check the status ng kapaligiran. May mga underwater faultline around the area. Consult the public about it then balansehin po sana ang kontribution nito sa Energy Requirement needed ng ating bansa. Kung ang 25,000 mega watt ay kailangan pero nasa 300 megatwatt lang at present at naka design sya sa 600 plus. still malayo pa tayo sa 10 percent. If the Government can lower 3 pesos per kilowat all over the country, then go for it. if not. hanap nalang ng pedeng mailipat sya somewhere safer.
The nuclear industry has been in decline in the USA for decades. Despite the country being one of the first nations to generate nuclear energy for commercial civilian purposes, there have been few developments since the late 1970s. For instance, since 1978, only two nuclear power plants have started construction, and that only occurred in 2013.
This industry has stalled because of various broad challenges related to economics, regulatory frameworks, and technological problems, as well as declining respect within the public sphere.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste, which in the US is mostly stored in tanks at sites owned by the Department of Energy
The industry was also fatally wounded by the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979, which caused new regulatory delays to the 51 new reactors that were under construction at the time. With the introduction of new safety procedures and back-fit requirements, the speed of construction was slowed down, and the costs skyrocketed for many reactors. After that, many contracts were canceled and the industry ground to a halt.
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Live by example baceause you choose to be a public servant
Kung gusto talaga bumaba koryente.. gobyerno na magpatakbo
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange
The price of electricity is formed at the energy exchange and it is always determined by the most expensive power plant which is necessary to meet demand. And usually it is the gas power plant which is the most expensive and determines the price of electricity
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
Tama lang na buksan na iyan
Reactors, which rely on technologies developed over 40 years ago. They are expensive to build and even more so to maintain across their lifecycle. Costs do not just concern the initial construction, but also the ongoing price of fuels, operational costs, and engineering fees. And then there’s the problem of the nuclear waste.
Nuclear energy ‘does not reduce the price of electricity’
Nuclear power plants can be attractive for their owners but not necessarily for consumers as they hardly ever determine the price of electricity on the energy exchange.
If you replace the capacity of a nuclear power plant for example by the capacity of a coal power plant, the price will not change because it is still the natural gas power plant being the most expensive one and deciding about the price.
This is a question of who gains and who pays. When somebody says that the nuclear power plant is cheap, it is for the owner but not necessarily for the consumer.
BBM should prioritize this before the end of his term.
For his reputation and others
Political will. Pres Marcos please
Ayaw Ng iba walang pirang makokorakot Jan taong bayan Lang makikinabang jan di mikikinabang ang mga negosyante at mga politiko jan