Difference between revisions of "Donald Miller"
(→Pro- Nuke and Anti-Wind) |
(→Pro- Nuke and Anti-Wind) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
"So where is this low cost and reliable energy to come from? Certainly not renewables, with their massive subsidies for a limited and uncertain production ...It is however worth noting that the French (as well as the Finns) are presently in the process of ordering the first of a new generation of power plant in advance of need so that they will be in a position to embark on a commercial ordering programme of proven plant just as soon as it is needed. In the United Kingdom the BNFL/Westinghouse naturally cooled PWR design offers even better economics and reliability." | "So where is this low cost and reliable energy to come from? Certainly not renewables, with their massive subsidies for a limited and uncertain production ...It is however worth noting that the French (as well as the Finns) are presently in the process of ordering the first of a new generation of power plant in advance of need so that they will be in a position to embark on a commercial ordering programme of proven plant just as soon as it is needed. In the United Kingdom the BNFL/Westinghouse naturally cooled PWR design offers even better economics and reliability." | ||
[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldselect/ldeucom/105/105we12.htm] | [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldselect/ldeucom/105/105we12.htm] | ||
| + | |||
| + | The following year in 2005, ''the Scotsman'' argued that: "electricity bills for average families will soar by £200 a year because of plans to introduce hundreds of wind farms across the country, according to the former chief of ScottishPower." | ||
In a letter to the ''Herald'' newspaper in February 2006, he argued: | In a letter to the ''Herald'' newspaper in February 2006, he argued: | ||
"No other significant power source can match nuclear costs. For wind, adding to the energy purchase price, the Renewables and Climate Change Levy subsidies, the costs of providing stand-by generation as well as the extra transmission (£6bn in Scotland alone), the Scottish consumer is paying four times the cost of power from British Energy's Scottish reactors and that includes provision for eventual decommissioning and waste disposal." [http://www.theherald.co.uk/55639.shtml] | "No other significant power source can match nuclear costs. For wind, adding to the energy purchase price, the Renewables and Climate Change Levy subsidies, the costs of providing stand-by generation as well as the extra transmission (£6bn in Scotland alone), the Scottish consumer is paying four times the cost of power from British Energy's Scottish reactors and that includes provision for eventual decommissioning and waste disposal." [http://www.theherald.co.uk/55639.shtml] | ||
Revision as of 15:24, 7 February 2006
Background
Sir Donald Miller is a SONE member and the former chairman of Scottish Power from 1982-92.
Pro- Nuke and Anti-Wind
Miller has consistently argued against renewable energy such as wind and for nuclear. He has also appeared as an objector against wind farms. [1] [2] In writtten evidence to the House of Lords Select Committee on Europe in 2004, he argued:
"The hazards of relying on massive imports of gas, with its much less flexible supply chain compared with oil and its exposure to foreign political instability and international terrorism are many times that which we have faced in the past and need to be a primary consideration in planning for our future energy supplies.
"So where is this low cost and reliable energy to come from? Certainly not renewables, with their massive subsidies for a limited and uncertain production ...It is however worth noting that the French (as well as the Finns) are presently in the process of ordering the first of a new generation of power plant in advance of need so that they will be in a position to embark on a commercial ordering programme of proven plant just as soon as it is needed. In the United Kingdom the BNFL/Westinghouse naturally cooled PWR design offers even better economics and reliability." [3]
The following year in 2005, the Scotsman argued that: "electricity bills for average families will soar by £200 a year because of plans to introduce hundreds of wind farms across the country, according to the former chief of ScottishPower."
In a letter to the Herald newspaper in February 2006, he argued: "No other significant power source can match nuclear costs. For wind, adding to the energy purchase price, the Renewables and Climate Change Levy subsidies, the costs of providing stand-by generation as well as the extra transmission (£6bn in Scotland alone), the Scottish consumer is paying four times the cost of power from British Energy's Scottish reactors and that includes provision for eventual decommissioning and waste disposal." [4]
