Rhostry,

There's a serious error in your calculations. Firstly 1000 * 0.6% isn't 60% it's 600%.
You're out by a factor of ten.

Secondly 120 * 0.6% isn't 0.72%, it's 72%
You're out by a factor of a hundred.

Thirdly, exponential decay calculations would be more appropriate than linear. So for a thousand miles at 0.6% loss the total loss would be (1-(0.994^1000))*100% = 99.76%
At 0.06% loss it would be (1-(0.9994^1000))*100% = 54.87%
And at 0.006% loss it would be (1-(0.99994^1000))*100% = 5.82%.

The last figure's closest to the truth. I suggest you read this to see why:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission

And finally, have a look at the real world figures for transmission loss:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.LOSS.ZS
Australia's at 5% and falling!

Aidan: 0.6 x 1000 as a way of working out percentages is completely wrong!
And the very worst mathematical obfuscation I've ever seen!
Do I have to teach you basic maths as well as even more basic science?
Honestly, do you actually expect anyone to believe any power authority, public or private, is going to generate electricity and push it down wires, that produce a 600% transmission line loss!?
And 0.6 times 120 divided by 100, is still 0.72% not the 72% you fatuously claim!
Alternatively you could try, 0.6 divided by 120, times 100, to arrive at a still lower 0.5%; which if multiplied by 1000, is 50%!
Let's try it one more time, using a common calculator.
Type in 0.6. Okay thus far?
Then hit the divide button; still with me?
Then type in 120, hanging in?
Yes I know it's very hard; but it'll be worth it later; then hit the times button and type in 100, then hit the equals button!
See it just wasn't that hard was it?
Is that smoke coming from your ears?
There, there, poor little ickle diddums; persist, it'll get easier?
You have a nice day now y'hear.
Cheers, Rhrosty.