Greenpeace: Arctic 30

[nickso]

There's a thing sitting in chernoble to this day that if you just walked past it by mistake you'd only have a few days to live!

Off topic a bit but genuinely out of interest....what thing? Been there and saw nothing that would kill you in a few days by walking by it.....make you ill but not kill. Several hundred people work there everyday in a block right next to the reactor that blew.

Yes, an example of over-reaction and panicking.
Chernobyl was the worst nuclear power station accident we have had and it hardly caused the end of the world, did it? And let's not forget that Chernobyl happened because of inadequate safety measures and controls in the Russian nuclear power system. Things are much safer in the West.

In fact, compare the number of people who have died working in the nuclear power industry with the number of people who have died working in coal mining.

Nuclear power is not only safe, but is the only practical option. The naysayers and greenies will have to live with it.

At the time it wasn't an over-reaction at all. If the Reactor had hit the water table they reckon most of Northern Europe would have been a wasteland. The only way they stopped that was by sending some poor miners in to fill the base with concrete.

The reactor itself was a **** design and one guys ego made it blow.

 

[Dave54]

I'm a simple bloke me. I want stuff to work when I want it to work. I don't want it to only work when nature decides to play, or to have the use rationed in some way. Before there was electricity and the gadgets it allows, life was hard. I can remember just the end of it. My mum had no washing machine until the mid 60s. She did it all by hand.
I don't want to go back to those times in this country because we are forced to meet some made up "green" ideal agreed for us by the usual bunch of idiots (read politicians), or their lapdogs, those particular statisticians and scientists who are in their pay in some way.
The reason we are seeing so many solar and wind schemes is really because of the subsidies they attract. Without them nobody would be interested as the economics don't really make sense. It's all so that our beloved leaders can show how "green" they are.
I wonder how green they'll look when they get some really, really, cold weather and they have older people dying in the cities due to power cuts because their beloved green schemes can't meet demand?
Get rid of all the silly subsidies, and put the money towards "Atoms for Energy"

 

[EFLImpudence]

It's not only the subsidies there is also 'rent' to the huge land 'owners' (stolen nine hundred and fifty years ago) and to the 'crown' for the off-shore wind farms (fifteen percent of the bills, I have read) because she 'owns' the sea-bed.

Feudalism lives on.

 

[Dave54]

It's not only the subsidies there is also 'rent' to the huge land 'owners' (stolen nine hundred and fifty years ago) and to the 'crown' for the off-shore wind farms (fifteen percent of the bills, I have read) because she 'owns' the sea-bed.

Feudalism lives on.

Yeah, we've had our politicians apologies for some of the various wrongs wrought by the British, long before our time. I've often wondered when we'll get an apology for nicking our country way back then, and get our land back. . .

 

[Norcon]

Yeah right. Chernobyl is safe. That must be why their gonna build a new sarcophagus around it costing billions capable of lasting a 100 years.
Livestock in the UK are still being detected with high levels of radiation in their bodies to this day because of Chernobyl.

And then people wonder why everyone is dying of cancer.

 

[Norcon]

There's a thing sitting in chernoble to this day that if you just walked past it by mistake you'd only have a few days to live!

Off topic a bit but genuinely out of interest....what thing? Been there and saw nothing that would kill you in a few days by walking by it.....make you ill but not kill. Several hundred people work there everyday in a block right next to the reactor that blew.

It was in a documentary and the scientists gave it a nickname.
Can't remember now but its still there and as lethal as ever and will be for thousands of years.

 

[Norcon]

I'm a simple bloke me. I want stuff to work when I want it to work. I don't want it to only work when nature decides to play, or to have the use rationed in some way. Before there was electricity and the gadgets it allows, life was hard. I can remember just the end of it. My mum had no washing machine until the mid 60s. She did it all by hand.
I don't want to go back to those times in this country because we are forced to meet some made up "green" ideal agreed for us by the usual bunch of idiots (read politicians), or their lapdogs, those particular statisticians and scientists who are in their pay in some way.
The reason we are seeing so many solar and wind schemes is really because of the subsidies they attract. Without them nobody would be interested as the economics don't really make sense. It's all so that our beloved leaders can show how "green" they are.
I wonder how green they'll look when they get some really, really, cold weather and they have older people dying in the cities due to power cuts because their beloved green schemes can't meet demand?
Get rid of all the silly subsidies, and put the money towards "Atoms for Energy"

Peak Uranium was way back in 1980 so nuclear is on its way out too.

I'm a simple bloke me. I want stuff to work when I want it to work.

Nothing simple about that.

That's a "demand" and one that nature will not let you away with!

 

[Nozzle]

"Chernobylite" a mixture of spent fuel, sand and cement all mixed together. Be under no illusions that these masses are a huge hazard, not least of all because the self-generating heat and radiation field is causing the glass-like mass to crumble and turn to dust - making it air borne. The huge holes in the sarcophagus roof let in masses of rain water (which under the right circumstance could make a mass start fissioning again) and wildlife who pick-up contamination on the way.

Sounds sensationalist?? Not in the slightest. And let me tell you where I'm coming from, I work in the Nuclear Industry, I love the work I do and I believe it is a required part of the energy mix.

Also be under no illusions that coal fired power stations, those that make up much of the UK base load only emit CO2 and sulphur dioxides (less so if it has a scrubbing plant). The exhaust stack of a coal fired power station sends up a great deal of radiation, and many millions of tonnes of exhaust by-product every year, and lakes worth of sulphuric acid. The Nuclear industry, as heavily regulated as it is, can account for every last gramme of spent fuel and ILW. The same regulations do not apply to coal but be assured the hazards are still very much there!

Nozzle

 

[Nozzle]

Peak Uranium was way back in 1980 so nuclear is on its way out too.

Peak oil, peak uranium, peak gas etc are economic terms. The more a commodity goes up in price, the more cost effective it becomes to mine in previously un-economic places. Would the Texans of the late 19th Century have bothered with the costs and risks of drilling in the Gulf of Mexico with all that oil just under the ground?

Were you aware there is even uranium in sea water. With this is mind, the initial resource, though still limited is vast. Also consider that the fuel cycle development has been stymied by the green lobby, and as such spent fuel is due to be cut up and buried in casks. Which is an utter shame, not just for the cash it'll cost to do it, but the amount of raw energy that is being buried/wasted. http://gehitachiprism.com/

Nozzle

 

[Norcon]

Were you aware there is even uranium in sea water

Yes.




When you take developing countries into consideration wanting to burn stuff like we do and the fact thet the world will have 9 billion inhabitants in a few decades then you can tear up all current forecasts on how long fuel will last as they are anything but realistic.

 

[Nozzle]

You're absolutley right, too many people on the planet. What method do you propose to regulate this matter?

Nozzle

 

[joe-90]

WW3 the most likely and most effective.

 

[JBR]

Were you aware there is even uranium in sea water. With this is mind, the initial resource, though still limited is vast. Also consider that the fuel cycle development has been stymied by the green lobby, and as such spent fuel is due to be cut up and buried in casks. Which is an utter shame, not just for the cash it'll cost to do it, but the amount of raw energy that is being buried/wasted. http://gehitachiprism.com/

Nozzle

That's interesting. I've often thought that there should be some way of making use of energy remaining in nuclear waste, if only the radiated heat.

 

[JBR]

You're absolutley right, too many people on the planet. What method do you propose to regulate this matter?

Nozzle

Send lots of money to Oxfam and Save the Children!

 

[nickso]

Yeah right. Chernobyl is safe. That must be why their gonna build a new sarcophagus around it costing billions capable of lasting a 100 years.
Livestock in the UK are still being detected with high levels of radiation in their bodies to this day because of Chernobyl.

And then people wonder why everyone is dying of cancer.

I didn't say it was safe, merely the risk of death was low at the moment. The current sarcophagus is indeed ****ed but that is hardly a surprise for something erected hastily to contain a very current news story.

Plenty of the guys throwing the graphite off the roof by hand are still alive although many are disabled.