We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
have you switched to an energy company that does not frack?
Comments
-
I'm a definite don't care, possibly if fracking does actually begin and causes any problems I may reconsider.0
-
So anybody who doesn't care is stupid?PollySouthend wrote: »Lol and you try to call me stupid.
That's as bad as your other thread where "anybody who doesn't agree with me is stupid".0 -
This looks like the sort of controversial subject that gets people het up and sniping at each other, a bit like politics & religion.
You either care or you don't but that should be up to anyone to give their opinion without being criticised or insulted.
I'm of the don't mind persuasion, I lived close to a nuclear power station for 35 years and came to the conclusion that it was a lot better than clouds of muck going into the sky from fossil burning power stations.
I'm also not convinced by thousands of wind turbines either, they aren't reliable, they are a blight on the landscape and don't do what they promiseNever under estimate the power of stupid people in large numbers0 -
I agree, hence why I took such offence when "doesn't agree with me" starts getting replaced with "stupid".matelodave wrote: »You either care or you don't but that should be up to anyone to give their opinion without being criticised or insulted.
More to the point, you would have received a higher radiation dose from a coal fired plant too.matelodave wrote: »I lived close to a nuclear power station for 35 years and came to the conclusion that it was a lot better than clouds of muck going into the sky from fossil burning power stations.According to U.S. NCRP reports [source says 92 and 95], population exposure from 1000-MWe power plants amounts to- 490 person-rem/year for coal power plants and
- 4.8 person-rem/year for nuclear plants during normal operation, the latter being
- 136 person-rem/year for the complete nuclear fuel cycle
Me too. You only have to read a page or so about the manufacturing of the magnets used in these turbines, and the extraction methods used for neodymium, to realise how bad these turbines are for the environment!matelodave wrote: »I'm also not convinced by thousands of wind turbines either, they aren't reliable, they are a blight on the landscape and don't do what they promise
Still, its in China so I guess it can just be ignored.
0 -
So anybody who doesn't care is stupid?
That's as bad as your other thread where "anybody who doesn't agree with me is stupid".
You had your technologies all mixed up, I'm just asking a question, you keep trying to call me stupid.
What I actually said is people that don't check check their estimated readings against actual readings are stupid to be surprised that they are under / over estimated.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
