Government and Nuclear Power...

woollyjumper

seems like the government is planning to reduce Co2 then !

http://www.newnuclearpowernothanks.org/

Should we invest more into alternative energy - if we had more demand and volume the cost would reduce (we hope!) ... or should we implement Nuclear Power ?

kittiwoz

What makes you think it is a question of either/or?

tr3mor

I'm all for nuclear power, saves them putting bloody windfarms everywhere.

Did anyone see countryfile on sunday? They're planning to build the UK's biggest windfarm (200 or more 140m turbines) on Lewis, an island which has 60 pairs of golden eagles. It's an absolute disgrace!

Add to this all the huge roads they would have to build to get machinery to the sites in the first place.

I agree that wind turbines have their place, but surely they need to site them more sensitively!

Gray0103

With the news yesterday that Hunterston Nuclear Power plant has closed due to engineering problems, its time we started putting together a strategy that sees no more than 20% of our electricity being produced for the one source.

Then if we do encounter problems with all the Nuclear, Gas, Oil, Renewable, we will still have 80% as a back up .

going2die_rich

Nuclear power all the way!

People who say no to nuclear power due to safty concerns need to remember that other countries (maybe even rogue nations like North Korea and Iran) have nuclear weapons or will do soon. We are far more likely to be bombed by one of them than for a nuclear power station to have something go severaly wrong with it in the UK that is controlled and monitored by some of the best personnel in the country.

It provides us with a SECURE source of energy that isn't reliant on weather which is irratic and can not sustain our needs compared to nuclear. We also won't be held to ransom by oil or gas rich countries like Russia and Iran (and other OPEC nations) since our need for it would be dramitically reduce if all homes and businesses were powered through nuclear power. Leaving only cars and other transport with the need for oil. A reduction in demand allows for a reduction in cost.

Time to push the tree huggers to aside and be realistic about the UKs needs for the future and start building several nuclear plants to sustain our needs for the next technology power hungry era.

going2die_rich

Gray0103 wrote:

With the news yesterday that Hunterston Nuclear Power plant has closed due to engineering problems, its time we started putting together a strategy that sees no more than 20% of our electricity being produced for the one source.

Then if we do encounter problems with all the Nuclear, Gas, Oil, Renewable, we will still have 80% as a back up .

...Or build enough nuclear power plants to have surplus energy so if one or two go down we are always 100% self reliant.

In the times that we are producing more energy than needed we can simply sell it to europe.

martinpike

Wow, and there's me thinking it was a complicated issue!!!

;-)

Etheco_2

Why spend trillions creating a new nuclear hazard with no thought for future generations (cos lets face it, we're do tend to stuff it all up and have accidents) when we can invest that money in offshore windfarms and solar technology for domestic use?

I'm all for reducing reliance on fossil fuels though, just not that keen on nuclear as a solution.

Hereward

Etheco wrote:

Why spend trillions creating a new nuclear hazard with no thought for future generations (cos lets face it, we're do tend to stuff it all up and have accidents) when we can invest that money in offshore windfarms and solar technology for domestic use?

I'm all for reducing reliance on fossil fuels though, just not that keen on nuclear as a solution.

To be fair though, there will be no new nuclear hazard as the raw materials for the fuel rods are already radioactive. It just happens that the sources of the materials tend not to be near large population centres. In addition if you don't approve of nuclear as a solution, how are you going turn off the sun?

going2die_rich

Etheco wrote:

Why spend trillions creating a new nuclear hazard with no thought for future generations (cos lets face it, we're do tend to stuff it all up and have accidents) when we can invest that money in offshore windfarms and solar technology for domestic use?

I'm all for reducing reliance on fossil fuels though, just not that keen on nuclear as a solution.

Your not keen on it because of daft saftey fears that the media has put into your head. Nuclear power stations have some of the most stringent saftey measures around. Like I said in my previous post, you should be more worried about being nuked by North Korea or Iran than something happening to a UK built facility.

Wind Farms aren't exactly cheap and all can't guarantee a steady supply of electricity as who knows what the weather will be like in 20 to 50 years time.

The future generations will be fine with nuclear energy if they aren't brought up as tree huggers. The next generation is the reason we need the additional nuclear power plants as we are becoming a more power hungry country with all our new technology and gadgets.

Volcano

You want safety? take a look.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_radiation_accidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents

But thank god our own Sellafield is so safe eh?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/cumbria/4589321.stm

http://www.corecumbria.co.uk/newsapp/pressreleases/pressmain.asp?StrNewsID=231

You want to know other problems that Sellafield has caused since its inception?

http://www.american.edu/ted/SELLA.HTM

So concerned are the Irish government they have issued anti-radioactivity pills to their WHOLE population in case of an accident.
Never mind the affect the released radiation has on wildlife living in the area (pigeons so contaminated they are disposed of as nuclear waste, shellfish with levels so high they cannot be consumed, bans on fishing etc).

DO you know that fallout from Chernobyl has contaminated UK soils to the extent that cattle grazed in certain areas STILL REGULARLY EXCEEDS the permitted level of radiation and will do for many years to come?:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/country/article/0,,1752683,00.html

This also affects the economy of local farmers who face severe restrictions on selling their produce.

So whose volunteering to have one built in their backyard? Feel free to build windmills in mine.

who knows what the weather will be like in 20 to 50 years time.

I do. It's going to be windy.