Ready, steady… save!
You don’t need a chart to join in. Here are 2 ways to record your savings:
1. Cross it off
Pop a chart into your first post. Saved an amount? Cross it out! Read more »
£0.01 £0.02 £0.03
2. Write it down
Skip the chart and add updates to your first post. Read more »
“Another +£3 saved today. Go me!”
Use +£ before each new saving so it counts towards your total.
📨 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!
Hinkley Nuclear Power Station.
choille
Posts: 9,710
Forumite
Petition to attempt to get Philip Hammond to consider Re newable energy rather than this new nuclear power station at Hinkley which will be the first to be built i over two decades.
https://secure.greenpeace.org.uk/no-hinkley
https://secure.greenpeace.org.uk/no-hinkley
0
Comments
-
Have you considered how much extra renewable energy would be needed to remove the need for a nuclear power station, where would the standby power be coming from for when the renewables are not generating ?
There is a need for this power station, why try to block it.
Just noticed it is a greenpeace thing, or in other words do everything that they can to send us back to the stonage.0 -
The amounts of money that will need to be spent on this - 18 bn would go a long way in renewables ie wind, wave, solar & hydro.0
-
Doesn't remove the need for backup generation, so still need the nuclear plant0
-
Let's get fracking on with it. If others want to use candles, fine by me!0
-
Stupid Greenpeace, not realising that nuclear is a more realistic way to tackle global warming and that global warming is a bigger threat than radiation.
Of course it'd be ideal if we were 100% renewable but that's not realisticThis is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
MatthewAinsworth wrote: »Stupid Greenpeace, not realising that nuclear is a more realistic way to tackle global warming and that global warming is a bigger threat than radiation.
Of course it'd be ideal if we were 100% renewable but that's not realistic
No & it won't be if the will isn't there, nor the investment. Seems rather a heap of money to throw at something that other countries are not as enthusiastic about - even the PM is stalling.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 355.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 255K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 456.2K Spending & Discounts
- 248.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 606.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 179.1K Life & Family
- 264K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
