LWR versus SGHWR

  • Duncan Burn
Part of the Trade Policy Research Centre book series


In May 1969 the CEGB told the Select Committee that the HTR and SGHWR both ‘showed promise of significant economic advantages on the AGR’.1 The great development potential of the AGR was no longer talked of. The CEGB preferred the HTR; it promised lower costs, greater long-term economies, could be a direct source of high temperature process heat for industry, and, being gas-cooled, would use familiar technologies. They thought the remaining technical problems could be solved quickly, and that it could ‘probably be ordered in the next year or two’.2 In 1970 the CEGB called for tenders to be submitted in April 1970 for an HTR to be built at Oldbury.3


Pressure Vessel Energy Crisis Nuclear Plant Public Hearing Select Committee 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Copyright information

© Duncan Burn and the Trade Policy Research Centre 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duncan Burn

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations