Forum menu
[url= http://www.****/news/article-2128062/Russian-nuclear-giant-built-Chernobyl-interested-erecting-generators-Britain--glowing-references.html?ITO=1490 ]Radioactive sheep ahoy![/url]
-1 for admitting to read the daily mail
there are currently 2 approved designs for New Nuclear Reactors in the UK one is a French design by Areva the other is a Westinghouse (formally UK owned)
Both are completely different to the Chernobyl reactor which was fatally flawed in design and operated very badly.
@mikewsmith, if only it was that simplistic 🙂 Admittedly the online version is radically different from the printed, but then I know a writer for the Daily Heil and have received some insights that help calm my irrational fears.
Oh no. Somebody please restrain TJ!
In other news today..........
Wildlife in area arround Chernobyl is doing better for the lack of human interferance. So nuclear disaster is better for wildlife than the rest of humanity!
We don't have the wide open spaces of the Ukraine. If, for example, Sizewell went a bit wobbly you'd need to evacuate most of London.
Major nuclear disaster in the UK -> We all end up living in caves
No new major sources of electrical power -> We all end up living in caves
I call dibs on Priest's Hole!
but then I know a writer for the Daily Heil and have received some insights that help calm my irrational fears.
Not sure what you mean here??
10 years working in the Civil Nuclear industry calmed most of mine.
[url= http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/03/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sources.html ]Deaths per TWh for energy sources[/url]
Although deaths in non-nuclear sectors are once and for all deaths, they don't keep on killing as radiation does.
Although deaths in non-nuclear sectors are once and for all deaths, they don't keep on killing as radiation does.
Yeah, deaths from non-nuclear sources are actually deaths, which should make them slightly more concerning than statistical projections of nuclear armageddon
Remind me: just how many people were killed from living too near the coast compared to multiple reactor meltdown at Fukushima?
@Mike, the joy of being an Independent is in not being disallowed from using any and all news sources due to sectarianism. I should start posting more from the Sun, they've probably got the best journo's.
I should start posting more from the Sun, they've probably got the best journo's.
Well, they have the most efficient fact-finding techniques, allegedly...
Gov to heat up bidding on new Nuke stations - by bringing in Chernobyl builders
Except for the fact that the government hasn't brought in Rosatom, endorsed Rosatom, approached Rosatom or anything of the sort. The whole article is based on an offhand, meaningless comment by some PR douche. They can be interested all they want but Rosatom will never build a plant in the UK as long as they [s]keep failing to make political donations [/s]fail to operate in a transparent manner and stop supplying nuclear material to Iran.
Also, those figures in the blog you put up are missing some small details. Yes, the physical putting up and down of panels no doubt involves worker deaths, much as I believe putting wind turbines out at sea in the heaviest wind areas will do. But where is the figure for the massive financial cost of those, like friends of mine, who work for the Children of Chernobyl charities bringing the kids over here for months at a time to get them out of the radiation and stave off those illnesses/deaths? The government isn't paying for that, or the power companies. Push the illnesses/deaths so far in the future that, like our troops who were ordered to stand in the path of nuke testing, the original incident didn't legally harm/kill them.......
ps. I'm actually for nuclear power in the medium term till we create a new green technology worth using.
lol referring to the Daily Hate as a news source needs to be addressed by trades descriptions at the very least!!
Would you prefer I quote the Guardians take on it? They who run so many stories about tax avoidance, which the Left is thankful for and as a result has thus far not decided to challenge them on their own accounting.
You still aren't separating the print and online versions of the Daily Heil, run by two different people, with two different agendas. Until people realise this, blanket disapproval is too simplistic.
I had a left wing tutor think I was left wing myself. After heavily using Private Eye for something linguists related, his marking comments included "PE not a Left Wing publication" And?
mrdestructo: read the article again. 🙄
They can say they're interested all they like but there's not a single reference to any goverment official even entertaining the idea.
@Gary, I posted up the Daily Heil for lulz. The initial story I read elsewhere, and rather boring it was, suggested that there was only one bidder for the new builds and that in order to get the bidding quotes down they'd had to resort to getting the Chernobyl builders in. There was extra to be read about the company having improved H&S considerations, etc.
I'd rather have something built by people who'd cocked something up and learned from it than by someone who hadn't, I think....
No one wants to build them if they are going to be stuck with the decommissioning costs. privatisation? Only of the profits not the liabilities.
Either there will be no new plants built or the government will have to cover the massive future liabilities.
Nuclear simply makes no economic sense and the electricity companies know this so will not take it on unless the costs are underwritten by the governments
God, not this (radioactive) chestnut again...
[img] 
[/img]
Thats the one Kit.
I bet none get built without the governemnt taking responsibility for future liabilities in the formof clean up of accidents and / or decommisiiong. No company can take on those open ended committments
2 billion a year subsidy and its not enough