stunmaker wrote:
永遠解決不可能
1.建物不可能保證十萬年
2.建物所有權不可能保證十萬年
3.放寬標準可允許建物移轉(同為黃公館,但換位置或原地重建)
4.若原建物所有權人移轉(轉賣或繼承),就無法確保移轉後仍可放核廢料,
此時需要有接手機制(例如原黃公館移轉到廖公館).
核廢料最困難的就是要放十萬年,選擇在民宅中存放就要正視這些問題,
丟一句放我家沒問題,...只會造成更多問題.
看來你的記憶力有點問題，你之前是怎麼被打臉的都忘了?
CUFOX wrote:
看來你的記憶力有點...(恕刪)
1.建物不可能保證十萬年.
2.建物所有權不可能保證十萬年.
3.放寬標準可允許建物移轉(同為黃公館,但換位置或原地重建).
4.若原建物所有權人移轉(轉賣或繼承),就無法確保移轉後仍可放核廢料,
例如拋棄繼承,此時需要有接手機制(例如原黃公館移轉到廖公館).
5.現有的包裝容器材質在民宅環境多久要更換,錢由誰出.
6.四千多噸如何分配? 每戶四噸共1000戶? 美國如何定期到民宅檢查燃料棒?
核廢料最困難的就是要放十萬年,選擇在民宅中存放就要正視這些問題,
丟一句放我家沒問題,...只會造成更多問題.
反之某些人選擇無視這些問題,那燃料棒確實可以大街上隨便放即可.
stunmaker wrote:
1.建物不可能保證十萬年.
雖然剛剛才看到一個，不過會蠢到想只依靠一般住宅來保護核廢料的人應該不多。
stunmaker wrote:
2.建物所有權不可能保證十萬年.
3.放寬標準可允許建物移轉(同為黃公館,但換位置或原地重建).
4.若原建物所有權人移轉(轉賣或繼承),就無法確保移轉後仍可放核廢料,
你錯了，不想要核廢料的人別接手即可確保移轉後仍可放核廢料。
stunmaker wrote:
5.現有的包裝容器材質在民宅環境多久要更換,錢由誰出.
永遠不用維護的方案早就一堆了。
stunmaker wrote:
6.四千多噸如何分配? 每戶四噸共1000戶?
都可以。
stunmaker wrote:
美國如何定期到民宅檢查燃料棒?
那是雞婆美國人要煩惱的問題。
stunmaker wrote:
反之某些人選擇無視這些問題,那燃料棒確實可以大街上隨便放即可.
燃料棒只要包好的確可以放街上。
stunmaker wrote:
核廢料最困難的就是要放十萬年,選擇在民宅中存放就要正視這些問題,
丟一句放我家沒問題,...只會造成更多問題.
民眾說放我家是要解決地點問題，如何防護是技術人員的問題。
總之，有問題須要解決不代表沒可能，沒可能你的頭。
stunmaker wrote:
請問你離岸風電的貸...(恕刪)
前幾日看沃旭的新聞還是無實體擔保
沃旭表示自籌款約四成，其餘貸款由母公司全額擔保
看了資訊才知道台灣的硬體設置高過外國很多很多，等於在初期就打算把投入的錢從台灣貸款這邊先拿回
看起來就像幾年前的高鐵事件，五大股東自己包工程，從工程這邊賺回投入的資金
事實上就是大撈家
以下轉載自
Orsted chooses three banks to oversee the loan for its wind energy projects
Danish energy company Orsted A/S has selected three local lenders as lead banks to oversee a syndicated loan to finance its offshore wind projects in Changhua County.
State-owned Bank of Taiwan (台灣銀行), BNP Paribas Taiwan and Cathay United Bank Co (國泰世華銀行), are to oversee a five-year revolving credit facility of NT$25 billion (US$810.4 million), Orsted said
The syndicated loan is expected to attract about 10 other local lenders and be finalized in the first quarter of next year, Orsted and the three lead banks told a news conference in Taipei.
Given the smaller scale of the loan, local lenders can use the opportunity to familiarize themselves with financing opportunities in the offshore wind power industry while limiting exposure, Bank of Taiwan said.
As half of the loan issue is guaranteed by Orsted, it presents a perfect opportunity for Taiwanese lenders to try their hand at renewable energy financing and tap into an emerging industry at relatively lower risk, Orsted regional general manager Matthias Bausenwein said.
Orsted was the biggest initial public offering on the NASDAQ Copenhagen when it was listed in June 2016, Bausenwein said, adding that the company is 50.1 percent owned by the Danish state.
The company has maintained investment grade and sound credit ratings of “BBB+” and “Baa1” respectively, and is fully capable of developing, building, owning and operating world class wind power plants in Taiwan, he said.
Following deregulation by the Financial Supervisory Commission, Orsted is also planning to become one of the first foreign companies to issue green bonds denominated in New Taiwan dollars, he said.
Orsted is considering issuing a separate NT$165 billion in green bonds to finance its bigger offshore wind sites in Changhua, but its final decision would depend on whether it is able to sign a power purchase agreement (PPA) with the government at the current feed-in tariff rate, Bausenwein said.
As the end of the year nears, Orsted is still awaiting final approvals to ink a PPA.
內文搜尋
從 APP 打開
X