no it is not Eine A; it is a pragmatic option and as this article makes clear, we are in a tight spot globally, demand will rise and supply will not grow in anything like proportion ... so what is any one proposing? vast energy shortages? burning al the forests, and all the coal in dirty power generators? because that is what will happen ....
-
According to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe. -
We are in a tight spot because population growth is out of control. If nuclear power is so safe, build a power station in London and bury the waste there.Originally posted by aka Calum Da Jazbo View Post
The tsunami showed us the immense power of th sea. That's what we should be using, but we only pay it lip-service. I'm a member of the RSPB, which opposes large estuary barrages, but I'm afraid I disagree with their policy. There are a few wave power plants under construction, but many more are needed.Comment
-
no it didn't - it shows that water is virtually imcompressable + moves fairly quickly when given a jolt of energy equivalent to 300MTons of TNT - the energy came from the movement of subducting plates.Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View Post
wave power should be used but twitchers are yet another form of tree hugger - however once oil goes up again once Saudia Arabia lands in turmoil then I'm sure everyone in these Northern climes will be happy to realise that waders are more importantLast edited by Frances_iom; 21-03-11, 16:47.Comment
-
"Today, it is possible to visit the area, including the exclusion zone, as radiation levels are low enough so that people can spend short periods of time in the region. Some people, especially older ones, have chosen to move back into the area. Currently, there are around ten thousand people inhabiting the surrounding Chernobyl area, although Pripyat remains a virtual ghost-town."Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View Post
guided tours sold quite openly on webComment
-
Battersea .... i would and happily live next to it ....build a power station in London and bury the waste there.According to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe.Comment
-
Chris Hulme scrapped the Severn Barrage scheme in October last year (in favour of nuclear, etc). The scheme could have provided up to 5% of the UK's electricity. I guess it is a very long time since the UK felt self confident enough to embark on big scale engineering projects such as we used to do in the Victorian era and which the French still do with aplomb.
By the way, as far as Chenobyl is concerned, if you want to be really frightened about what might have happened in Soviet Russian please do read this account of the sclerotic Soviet nuclear management and of the incident itself. It was written by G.U. Medvedev and published in 1989. Elsewhere I have seen it described as "a competent and dispassionately truthful account of the tragedy that occurred more than 3 years ago and which is continuing to disturb millions of people. This is perhaps the first time we have such a complete first-hand account in which nothing is kept back and there is no departmental "diplomacy." The author is a nuclear power specialist who worked for a time at the Chernobyl AES and knows it well, just as he is personally acquainted with all the principal participants in the events."
Comment
-
Frances is one of the people I described as 'gung ho' for nuclear power - & still hasn't answred my question about what to do with the waste.Originally posted by Frances_iom View Post
I wonder why scientists - in common with religionists - feel that they have the only answer & anything else is wrong? & feel that they can use terms like 'tree-hugger' in the same way that some people in the USA use 'liberal'?Comment
-
Do you actually know any scientists?Originally posted by Flosshilde View Post
I'm sure some scientists think like that, just as some green advocates do, just as some animal liberationists do, but it is a very silly remark to make.Comment
-
Find a deep hole and bury it ? - there are salt domes that have been undisturbed for millions of years why should they suddenly become unsuitable ?Originally posted by Flosshilde View Post
Most waste is actually low level waste (eg from hospital radiology depts - we would have this anyway) + doesn't require high security etc,
waste from weapons (eg warheads) is already being recycled via your dreaded MOX etc or in other reactors
Other waste can mostly be glassified prior to disposal and volumes are actually quite small.
Have you read http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf04.html - my own opinion is that 99% of the problems are political not technologicalComment
-
johnb - Thanks for that second link. I cannot claim to have read it all yet but I have read quite a bit of it. It really is a most extraordinary and excellent piece of writing.
Because it is a dispassionate account, though deeply moving, I am not quite sure what the main messages are to be drawn from it. Clearly one is that the numbers of errors were huge and probably unique. It is difficult to believe that things could ever happen in the same way again, at least in countries with a nuclear history. Secondly, there is the system thing. That everyone complying even when they knew things weren't as described or being played out. The king's new clothes syndrome. You could put a case forward for that being characteristic of a Soviet mentality but I think most of us could think of similar experiences here in other fields. However questioning and even rebellious a society, it is also a part of the human condition.
There is a lot of description about the terrain - water tables, flatness, population density etc. One thing that I find very odd about the siting of our nuclear power stations is how they don't seem to share many environmental characteristics. Some are in hilly areas, some not. Some are east, some are west. Some are near densely populated areas and others aren't. The author mentions the egotistical aspects of man's nuclear discovery and how that can lead to complacency about safety. I wonder if these inconsistencies are symptomatic of our past decisions and proposals, along with the practical difficulties about planning consent in new locations. Mostly, the piece is wonderful in combining human realities, science and unfussy lyricism. This is a very real story with a touching humility, permitting frailties and limitations in people without being barbed in its evident criticism of them or overly accepting of human inferiority.
I therefore ask why we don't have any documentaries about those who work in the nuclear industry here at all levels. Joe goes out on a Saturday night with his mates, gets on a bus to the plant on Monday morning, is just one of the regular workers, is still conscious of safety. The food in the canteen isn't bad. Here he is describing it in his own words. The other thing that strikes me is that there are some similarities here with airspace. The national boundaries are less relevant, certainly in terms of any potential adverse impact. Perhaps the location of nuclear plants in any country should be subject to agreement with the international community, at least in terms of negotiation with immediate neighbours.
I am still anti, of course, but I commend you on providing this contribution. It couldn't be bettered. On the separate point about phraseology, I writhe with irritation every time someone describes modern wind energy technology as "the windmills" - Lat.Last edited by Guest; 22-03-11, 07:16.Comment
-
Mea culpa!Originally posted by amateur51 View PostThat'd be yer actual Chris Huhne, I believe.
(Not sure that he is my Chris Huhne though!
)
Comment
-
Comments by Andrei Sakharov in 1989 in relation to the Chernobyl disaster:
Although I am not anti-nuclear I think Sakharov's words have a universal relevance beyond the (then) Soviet Union.These issues are so crucial that they cannot be left to technical experts, and still less to
bureaucrats, whose approach is too narrowly technical, too tendentious and sometimes
prejudiced, as it is paralysed by a network of mutual solidarity. Glasnost must apply to every
aspect of the Chemobyl disaster; its causes and consequences. The absolute truth must be
known. Everyone must be able to form an opinion about a matter which vitally affects our lives
and our health, as well as the health of our offspring. Everyone must be entitled to take part in
the adoption of decisions that will determine the future of our country and of the world.Comment
-
It's still strange that they don't bury it in London. Or that when someone dumped a bag of sand from the beach at Sellafield in Whitehall, the road was cordened off. The true NYMBYs?Originally posted by Frances_iom View PostComment
-
20-3-11 - "Chernobyl clean-up expert slams Japan, IAEA" - http://www.sciencemagnews.com/cherno...apan-iaea.html
Actually, I am somewhat concerned about this new Chernobyl-area tourism. No official authority seems to be questioning the huge discrepancy between the purported levels of radiation inside the "safer" areas of the zone and the hundreds of years it was originally scientifically assessed to be before anyone could enter it. It strikes me that this could be a case of people making money out of others' curiosity and not being honest with the facts - http://wikitravel.org/en/Chernobyl
In fact, rampant capitalism of the nastiest psychological kind is alive if not well in modern day Ukraine. Shortly before "Chernobyl tourism" began, Kiev company GSC Games World, released three Chernobyl video games. Details of the first, "Stalker: Shadow of Chernobyl", are shown here. It is described as a "first-person shooter video game" which "features an alternate reality theme" including "human mutants". So what they are doing internationally is getting kids involved in that way, blurring the reality of it, and then encouraging them to the "theme park". Sinister or what. Apparently some 17 year old Americans are moaning because they can't visit the place yet on account that they need to be 18 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L...w_of_Chernobyl
As for the visit, "scientists researching the effects of Chernobyl at the U.S. National Cancer Institute declined comment but an unaffiliated biologist pointed out that many other adventurous vacations (think a steep mountain climb) are not risk-free, either". http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/La...the-um-history. I guess there is a difference here because at least people have the choice about it but the message it subtly sends out is radiation is all fine. The same actually with the Hiroshima monitoring. Exploitation in many senses. The industry moans about views being expressed on the basis of limited knowledge but with commercial enterprises of that nature, alongside its evasiveness, it sustains that imbalance. Sometimes it can seem less like a religion, as has been suggested, and more like a brainwashing religious cult. Contrast with Medvedev.
While this might suit powerful interests in the current day - it makes new nuclear power schemes easier and, in the case of Hiroshima, could also seem to justify the use of nuclear bombs - as always Governments and companies are inconsistent and short-sighted. It could be carte blanche to middle eastern fanatics for example. Dame Elizabeth Manningham Buller may well be right that ultimately talks will be needed with Al-Qaeda but I doubt there is much they will think that we can offer them other than nuclear weapons and, possibly, nuclear power. I can't see them buying into anything else seeing that they are totally against "markets".Last edited by Guest; 23-03-11, 17:13.Comment
Comment