The first level consideration of the public has been "Why should we support that wastefulness of keeping the useless Royals?" This solution at least takes the "waste" out of the picture.
But beware, Royals! Next, with that question out of the way, we will quickly go down to "Why should the useless Royals now have these excellent devices to power their own lifestyles, when the public at large is denied them?"
As always, of course, we could view the endless descent of arguments as a reflection of how the public is "never satisfied" with ANY degree of accommodation to their whims.
But I suggest we take a different view of such public discussions. I say we think of them AS discussions, in which the resolution of one issue MAKES WAY FOR a further evolution of the discussion. In this case, the adoption by the Royals (and THANK YOU, Royals) LET'S the discussion evolve to the perfectly appropriate next step, that of extending such non-polluting energy to others -- whoever in the country is capable of using such resources.
This view lets us diffuse the anti-anti meme for viewing discussions, which may in turn let us sooner consider which ways to go next.
Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
Forcing your argument...
Posted by Wallace Bob
10th Sep 2011
Just
In
In
Forcing your argument...
Posted by Wallace Bob
10th Sep 2011
Show:
-1
Votes
As always, the discussion will continue...
Posted by Lightning Joe
9th Sep 2011
+1
Vote
Still paying a premium
The screws cost 1.7 million pounds, or about $2.72 million. The average KWH rate in the US is about 11 cents (a lot less if you can get it from conventional hydro). So that $2.72 million could be used to purchase 24.7 million KWH. That means for the same price the Royals could have gotten electricity for at least 14.5 years which might be close to the service life of the screws.
Given that most of us commoners would probably have to finance such an installation up front (which means interest payments), I don't see any bargain here.
Given that most of us commoners would probably have to finance such an installation up front (which means interest payments), I don't see any bargain here.
Posted by zackers
9th Sep 2011
+2
Votes
Forcing your argument...
Why should these devices last only 14.5 years? Are they appreciably different from the turbines in dams which operate for decades.
If one assumes a more typical 30 year lifetime for 'big stuff', then the Royals will be getting their power for half price.
And why not give the Royals some credit for being early adopters, the folks who pay more for emerging technology which then allows the technology to mature and drop in price for the rest of us.
If one assumes a more typical 30 year lifetime for 'big stuff', then the Royals will be getting their power for half price.
And why not give the Royals some credit for being early adopters, the folks who pay more for emerging technology which then allows the technology to mature and drop in price for the rest of us.
Posted by Wallace Bob
10th Sep 2011