RE: The next steps31 Aug 2022 10:48
Seg
I hear what you say, but the cost of such a project is but a drop in the ocean compared to the development of nuclear power generation, and more importantly, it taps into the current "energy security" paranoia and the anti hydrocarbon agenda. Add into the mix the fact that once the upfront cost has been borne, there is virtually no on cost, insfoar as feed stock is concerned, meaning it's a kind of "energy for free" holy grail.
It may well be that the government decides on a keyensian capital projects drive route out of recession, and this is a good fit in this respect, as it puts ticks in so many of the right boxes.
As for planning, etc. If Government decides that this should proceed, then it is highly unlikely that it would not proceed.
Remember, this is an on demand supply, unlike all other renewables (and, it would seem fuel cell technology at present) and therefore there is no need for a storage medium, it simply gets pumped down the wire when needed.
I understand that this won't necessarily affect the current AFC target market, but the availability of cheap non emissions electricity could change that market, if battery / supercapacitor storage capabilities improve, but this is of course all in the long grass at the moment.
Not a subtle bash, just saying that there are things out there which are a light at the end of the tunnel.