yawood January 26, 2020 07:04 PM This is what Australia needs. We have all the fuel we need right here and we can get away from coal. Our biggest climate problems in Australia are a lack of water and too many coal-fired power stations. If the politicians want to do something useful they should build desalination plants all around the coast run by mini nuclear power plants. In one project they can solve the water problems and get rid of the reliance on coal in one fell swoop. fen January 26, 2020 07:15 PM Worrying. UK does not have the cleanest record in Nuclear energy. They cant keep dumping their nuclear waste non stop in the sea in leaking barrels. Now they are out of the EU, they will likely start dumping it everywhere. The welsh sites were built there specifically to keep fallout away from London, and if they melt down the destroy the natural resources of Ireland not the UK. The Irish sea is full of very deep trenches, and the UK promised over and over that they never dumped waste in them, but the latest freedom of information requests show they have been. Its even more disrespectful to Ireland as they are anti nuclear and dont even let nuclear warships enter their waters. MarkHughes4096 January 27, 2020 01:00 AM When I read the word "Mini" I imagined it powering a town of maybe 10,000 people. Apparently RR have a different definition. I quite like the idea, The UK has been reducing its coal use every year and next up should be the gas. uday pasricha January 27, 2020 02:40 AM We should all be grateful that a responsible name and brand takes forward the only technology that gives us zero emission. The dangers of war are all around us because all technologies seems to emerge from war. Our lives are focused on conflict as a tool for transaction. Hopefully Rolls Royce would have also checked out Bill Gates nuclear technology choice which uses spent fuel as the fuel source. Marc Delamea January 27, 2020 02:49 AM Ah! the article does not describe if the reactors will use Uranium or Thorium. Better believe it, Thorium is vastly more plentiful and safer to use than Uranium. The Thorium technology was licensed to the Chinese by president Obama some years ago having been mostly developed by the US in the 70's. If the Chinese are planning to use Thorium Rolls Royce will likely go bust trying to compete with dirty Uranium! Bogdan January 27, 2020 03:19 AM MW should be at least 1000 £ in order to feel its worth. Why they are building these plants? Because they afford wasting the money. Who will win? The workers who get those salaries. Paul Anderson January 27, 2020 03:40 AM The estimated cost per MWhr is already uncompetitive, and it’s probably optimistic anyway. Another foolish ‘solution’. Build them at your peril! Worzel January 27, 2020 03:51 AM Of course, they wont be thorium, which is relatively benevolent, compared to uranium, and this will make it even easier for every country in the world large or small to become a nuclear threat. It's been reported that China is making serious explorations into thorium, due to the dangers and shortages o uranium. Perhaps it would be good for RR to do the same. James Brown January 27, 2020 05:35 AM The biggest arguement against is the waste. if the waste is so harmful it must hold a lot of energy. why not capture that? why waste it? piperTom January 27, 2020 06:57 AM If this plan was actually good, then it would not need a subsidy. A big part of the problem is that governments insist on subsidizing... this plan, solar, wind, even coal! Maybe society is using too much energy because the true cost is hidden in taxes. Let them come up with a plan that can go without a subsidy, then I'll back it. Until that happens, just use less energy.