Abstract
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
Keywords
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Copyright information
© 1978 Duncan Burn and the Trade Policy Research Centre
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Burn, D. (1978). LWR versus SGHWR. In: Nuclear Power and the Energy Crisis. Trade Policy Research Centre. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-02107-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-02107-9_13
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-02109-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-02107-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)