France : ""there is no alternative to nuclear energy today."

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by sunnoficarus, Jun 29, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The bleeding hearts of the liberal left have ruled the roost in the UK over nuclear energy for far too long. It is the only sustainable way of getting electricity into the grid on the market today.Renewables have their place, but are unlikely to be able to supply the nation's (ever growing) energy needs for the foreseeable future.The tree-huggers need to wake up and smell the coffee. ****, I hate that phrase.
  2. Alsacien

    Alsacien LE Moderator

  3. only if we could follow

  4. Having looked at France's nuclear plans, they have their heads screwed on. All 60ish nuclear plants to be replaced with new plants with far more capacity on a rolling programme.
    When the oil runs out, France is going to coin it selling electrikery to it's neighbours.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Alsacien

    Alsacien LE Moderator

    Who is Frances? What is he planning?

    France will be in a position to supply well beyond its own needs, and that is quite a powerful position to be in, especially with no competition....
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Wind, solar, tidal, hydroelectric, etc all have their place. But nothing will replace nuclear for good, long-term baseload. I'd love to see stacks of small TWT Thorium reactors scattered across the country. They use waste from other reactors to burn the Thorium, produce far less waste and because the fuel is already molten they can't suffer burn-throughs like happened in Japan. On top of that they are sealed throughout their lifetime so can't suffer from the proliferation threat such as that seen in Iran.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Trans-sane

    Trans-sane LE Book Reviewer

    These the "5th generation" reactors I read about in the Economist about 18 months ago? Seemed like a really smart system that just needed some (fairly heavy) investment to get working on a worthwhile scale. And as we are already investing BILLIONS in the white elephant wind-farms... Especially as having the tech and skills to build new reactors would be a VERY useful export commodity.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Alsacien, you are so out of touch. The Greens have got it all sorted, there will be enough wind and solar energy for all, even without nuclear power. We won't need to import electricity from anywhere, and as a bonus it will only cost us about 2 cents per Kw extra.

    And can I have some of that stuff they've been smoking?
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Well they are the 'green' party...
  10. Nuclear? We have enough coal to keep the lights on in the UK for at least a century......
  11. At least 350 years, according to the figures I saw, but the supply of small boys has dried up somewhat!

    • Like Like x 1
  12. I recently read that a prototype Thorium reactor had been fired up, and had worked. However, that is not the same as producing MW of power at 99.8% availability. As is the case with fusion technology (always tomorrow's technology...), I think we are a long way from introducing this technology, and the government does not have the wherewithal to kickstart development.

    I think we will survive because a gas powered station can be built reasonably quickly (5 years?) and National Grid has already built most of the infrastructure for handling large volumes of LNG.

    The problem is that burning gas does nothing for the environment - if that is your worst fear.

    • Like Like x 1
  13. The problem with LNG is that most of it belongs to swarthy men who like wear laundry on their heads
    • Like Like x 4