New Nuclear Power Stations - why so long?

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7179579.stm

It seems the government might actually make a decision on this at last!

Why has it taken so long to come to what should be an obvious conclusion, how many meetings and staff have we paid for for them to come up with something a 2nd year science undergrad could tell you in two minutes.

Lets hope they stick with this and see it through, sadly the Lib Dems are against this though, and we're stuck with two party politics until they get off their idealistic high horse and see things for what they are.

TB
 
#2
On R4 this morning the key point about this aspiration is that the chances of them being built by 2023 are extremely slim. There are only 4 or 5 firms in the world who can build them, China and France want lots and we are well down the list. The core-skills to man them barely exist in this country so we will have to buy in the experts from the countries that are ahead of us, who will want to keep them.
 
#3
Our declining skill base makes the matter even more pressing IMHO... if we wait much longer we'll be in an even worse position.

The building of new reactors is something that should have been started 15 years ago.

TB
 
#4
To answer the question in the thread title:

a. Tree hugging fcukwits scaring the public with tales of Chernobyl, Sizewell B etc., leading to

b. Cowardice of successive Govts to make an obvious decision.
 
#5
Nice article in the latest private eye:
Apparently, Broon had no doubts in awarding the contracts to the firm French energy giant EDF who happens to be represented by Mr Brown, no other than the brother of the one eyed gimp.
 
#6
What do we pay them for? Really...?

I mean they sit about discussing Binge Drinking and other social cack (If they're over 18, then they can drink what they want, if they're under 18 then leave it to the parents) when there are bigger things to talk about.

Our energy security for the next 30-60 years seems pretty low down the agenda... given that GW1 was about oil/energy security, during which time we pissed off Bin Laden enough to form a terrorist group which is the core reason we're now in Iraqistan. Add to that we buy our energy from the Ruskies when they feel like selling it and things look quite grim. I mean, come on!

Build the plants and disconnect any tree hugger who objects, let them stick a windfarm in their back garden and live off the land.

Rant Off.

TB
 
#7
swapping home grown commie coal for overseas commie gas or tsarist gas
seems an own goal

it was pretty obvious 1/3 rd of our power comes from nukes it was going to have to be replaced

big fan of renweables but base load is base load get on with it
 
#8
And we could always dump the waste on helmand cant grow heroin if
youre dying of cancer :twisted: .
Their exspensive and difficult to manage .Why not just build tidal barrages.Its not like waves stop .And we dont have any uranium mines in the uk.
 
#9
woody said:
And we could always dump the waste on helmand cant grow heroin if
youre dying of cancer :twisted: .
Their exspensive and difficult to manage .Why not just build tidal barrages.Its not like waves stop .And we dont have any uranium mines in the uk.
Because the "Greenys",don't mind us going back to the stone age,but perish the thought that in the process,we might disturb the habitat of the lesser spotted,great crested,flycatching,warbler thrush,by altering the tidal flow across the coastal marshes! :roll:
 
#10
oh for fcuk sake what are we supposed to do then :? .I'd like to be a green
but i realised I hate the fcuking country side its full on one sided hills & mud.
 
#11
I live in Kent,not far from Dungeness Nuclear Power Station,and also not far from the confirmed site of a land based wind farm,which against all the local opposition is being built on a site of outstanding natural beauty,beside an RSPB site,you can guess which one I prefer. :roll:

The only upside to the situation is,the tree-huggers don't know if they want to shout,or shite,they are like a bunch of headless chickens at the moment,it's fabulous. :lol:

We all want a green utopia,but it aint gonna happen in my lifetime.
 
#12
did a cft to dungerness power station once PC thought it would be fun to get piccys of the platoon posing in S6's outside said nuke station :evil:
but had to rip the arrse out of it by running up to civvi's gong theres been a leak :twisted:

believe the CO of 10 para got a very strong letter of complaint pity we were a hat unit :twisted: those recruiting team business cards come in handy :twisted:
 
#13
The French have a good way of getting the locals to agree to the power stations.
If the station can be seen from your house, you are entitled to free electricity. They had people standing on roofs claiming a glimpse thus over riding the objections regarding spoilt views.

Bottom line is that there is no other viable solution, Nuclear is the only option at the moment, we are far too reliant on imported energy and with Russian relations becoming strained, it's not ideal.
 
#14
One of the main problems with nuclear power is what we are going to do with the waste?.Some of the waste has a half life of thousands of years.
I reckon there will be another PFI type deal where some company offers to do it on the cheap for a few years then ramps the price up. Its not as if the country has a lot of nuclear waste disposal experts to pick and chose. It will be pay up or you are in the shit.
 
#15
I remember a programme on telly some years ago warning of this situation and it said then that the only real opposition would come from the greeners but I've yet to see anything these tw@ts DONT get a bag on about. If we don't get a grip of things very soon we are all going to be wearing dish-dashes and flip-flops with all of the 'decorative' and a fair old percentage of the edible plants and animals long dead. But rather than agreeing to the fastest and most reliable/economical method of preventing such a thing from happening, they bitch and moan dragging the whole process out even longer, bringing us to the point where there'll just be us and the cockroaches left with the only arguments they have being based on possibilities whilst the effects of continued reliance on fossils are a certainty.

Morons. I'm gonna go out and run some over in my V8 Landrover.........
 
#16
I'm reliably informed that the waste encased in concrete and sunk in a geologically sound area is perfectly safe. The one thing they won't do is drop it overboard. (Obviously there's more to it with the concrete stuff it but I have to confess I'd "tuned" out during the full explanation and was thinking about what to cook for supper :roll: :oops: )


Apparently there is a system in Finland and in Sweden where the locals are involved in the waste disposal in some form or other thus creating jobs in the local area, again there was a more detailed explanation but again...........the whole tuning out thing happened.
 
#17
I appreciate the reasons for using renewable energy (although I'm not completely sold on the idea that the world is screwed unless we all wear recycled bags and eat tofu). But does anyone know the energy deficit of a wind turbine or a solar panel - that is the amount of time it takes before the equipment produces more energy than it took to make the raw material available, manufacture it and get it installed?

Nuclear energy has always seemed to be the obvious choice!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#18
brighton hippy said:
swapping home grown commie coal for overseas commie gas or tsarist gas
seems an own goal

it was pretty obvious 1/3 rd of our power comes from nukes it was going to have to be replaced

big fan of renweables but base load is base load get on with it
Quote Woody:
And we could always dump the waste on helmand cant grow heroin if
youre dying of cancer .
Their exspensive and difficult to manage .Why not just build tidal barrages.Its not like waves stop .And we dont have any uranium mines in the uk.
feck me surround sound! :p
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#19
Lets face it no power generation is either cost free, carbon neutral or produces no waste!
we should be using all of the available options as cleaning up sellafield will cost 70 Bn and last until 2120. Not that any of us will see that and lets face it the crap and crud left over afterwards will still have to be dumped somewhere and its going to make readybrek kids glow for fecking ever!
 
#20
Horridlittleman said:
I appreciate the reasons for using renewable energy (although I'm not completely sold on the idea that the world is screwed unless we all wear recycled bags and eat tofu). But does anyone know the energy deficit of a wind turbine or a solar panel - that is the amount of time it takes before the equipment produces more energy than it took to make the raw material available, manufacture it and get it installed?

Nuclear energy has always seemed to be the obvious choice!
While I was in shrivenham some rather clued-up scientist said that wind turbines pay for themselves (in carbon producing terms) within a year, But he got rather excitable about solar panels and politicians love of them as they take 20 odd years to pay for themselves.


Nuclear seem a good short answer but how much energy is used looking after the waste?
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top