We just can't afford to create gobs of energy in isolated places, and lose half of it in transmission losses.
That it truly stupid, in 2012.
A distributed network of medium-sized modular reactors based on the HTGR concept would be very sweet. Site them a few hundred miles apart to minimize transmission losses, but have enough interconnects to allow redundancy, which provides for a very robust reliability. A standardized design and modularity would allow you to produce them in a factory and then move them on-site and get them running very quickly. The NGNP design at Idaho is inherently safe, modular, and could be sited underground if desired. The only problem is with the helium circulator. I have yet to see one that big that worked reliably, but it has been several decades since anyone tried it so maybe things have gotten better on that score.
That it truly stupid, in 2012.
***I agree. With such large transmission losses, it makes sense to look even at solar power generated at the source of need.
Right now in my utility area (PG&E), tier 3 rates are at 30cents/kwh, then 34, then 52 (maybe this last one has gone down). Solar panels can generate at about 25-29cents/kwh, so they can compete against PG&E in the higher tier rate usage.
Perhaps not, but there is one heck of a lot of NIMBY to overcome if that paradigm will change.
Everyone wants cheap electricity and gasoline, but no one wants to live near the power plant or the refinery (unless they work there).