Climate "Science"
#31
(10-12-2021, 04:50 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I have Smart Meters, no change in anything at all

Yet.
Reply
#32
Strange that Mrs.Thatcher is being blamed for the current situation. Thirty One years since she was ousted from office. Did I imagine the thirteen years of a labour government from 1997? Plenty of time to ‘rectify’ any oversight in a Nuclear Energy policy. Surely? Did the Blair government commission any new reactors?

In the late 70s and 80s there was a decided movement towards ‘Nuclear phase-out’ particularly following the New Mile Island incident and Chernobyl disaster. Fukushima didn’t help allay people’s fears either, prompting Germany to immediately decommission 8 plants and commit to the closure of all its 17 reactors by next year.  Italy has already shut down all its plants.

Several European countries have abandoned the construction of new of nuclear power plants. Austria (in 1978), Sweden (in 1980) and Italy (in 1987)  all voted via referendums to phase out nuclear power. In Ireland opposition prevented a nuclear program there. Countries which have no nuclear plants at present have restricted reactor construction include: AustraliaAustriaDenmarkGreeceItalyIrelandNorway.  Poland actually halted the construction of a plant. Belgium, Sweden, Germany and Spain have decided against building new plants and intend to phase out nuclear power completely.
 Groups in the anti-nuclear power lobby camp include: Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Sortir du nucleaire (France), The Institute for Energy and Environment Research.

So again, we ignore the history of a subject and just bash the U.K. (and of course the government which actually commissioned a new plant)  whilst ignoring the inconvenient fact that all those states that are usually highlighted as a shining example of what we should be, are actually taking a stance against the very thing some want the U.K. to embrace.

Let’s not say, either, that nuclear power is ‘clean’. There is still no way to clean up or dispose of the highly dangerous and long lived waste. Even the new ‘mini’ plants, being developed, will still produce dangerous waste.
Reply
#33
In the 1980s we needed to plan for the decommissioning of the Magnox reactors and plan their replacements. We planned for two replacements early in the 1980s and then the government binned commissioning any more, this was pre-Chernobyl. This, coupled with a refusal from government to finance nuclear plants to overcome capital cost barriers, are what has killed our nuclear development. It was under her governments that we squandered the platform, the same can be attributed to electrified railways, tilting trains and fibre telecoms.

And I don't see why you're bringing up other countries, they do not dictate what we do. France was not forced to decommission it's nuclear plants, was it?

As for nuclear waste, easily managed. You bury it underground. France isn't swimming under thorium is it? There's literally facilities for storing and transporting nuclear waste, anyone who says we don't know how to store it knows nothing about nuclear.
Reply
#34
(10-13-2021, 08:51 AM)Borin' Baggie Wrote: In the 1980s we needed to plan for the decommissioning of the Magnox reactors and plan their replacements. We planned for two replacements early in the 1980s and then the government binned commissioning any more, this was pre-Chernobyl. This, coupled with a refusal from government to finance nuclear plants to overcome capital cost barriers, are what has killed our nuclear development. It was under her governments that we squandered the platform, the same can be attributed to electrified railways, tilting trains and fibre telecoms.

And I don't see why you're bringing up other countries, they do not dictate what we do. France was not forced to decommission it's nuclear plants, was it?

As for nuclear waste, easily managed. You bury it underground. France isn't swimming under thorium is it? There's literally facilities for storing and transporting nuclear waste, anyone who says we don't know how to store it knows nothing about nuclear.

+1
Reply
#35
Modern plants produce very little waste, since modern plants don't produce material for weapons. It is, by far, the cleanest and most efficient solution to the energy problem the world faces. A lot of the waste by the way, is even reused in a different reactor, which produces very, very little waste, so with investment, there is little issue.

But the stupidity and gullibility of humanity will never, ever shock me.
Reply
#36
I think the emerging noises from China about it's own energy security pretty much doom COP to failure.

We ought to start thinking in the same way.
Reply
#37
How dare thousands of people from all around the globe meet up in Glasgow to shout about climate change. The human race can do more good by having a weeks holiday
Where everything stops. Much like when Covid first appeared. The global pollution levels disappeared ?
The very idea of flying thousands of people to Scotland really helps is total stupidity.
Rant over.
Reply
#38
Climate issues are the least of our worries. While a lot of the world are trying to save the planet the Chinese are busy trying to rule it. Have you seen their latest nuclear capable missile that just went round the earth? All created while belching out God knows what into the environment in lumps
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
{myadvertisements[zone_2]}