Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

It appears that Germany will be giving up its nuclear power. In my opinion that is a tragic move. Nuclear power has proven over and over again that it is safe. That the reactors in Japan survived a powerful earthquake and tsunami largely intact should be proof enough of that. At this point any replacement for nuclear power will be more costly, less effective, dirtier, and all together less safe.
 
jetsetter said:
It appears that Germany will be giving up its nuclear power. In my opinion that is a tragic move. Nuclear power has proven over and over again that it is safe. That the reactors in Japan survived a powerful earthquake and tsunami largely intact should be proof enough of that. At this point any replacement for nuclear power will be more costly, less effective, dirtier, and all together less safe.
Click to expand...

Thats something we can agree upon, however I do not think we should read too much into Germanys temporary security review. There are important elections coming up in a country where the greens have influence, I see this as nothing more than political posturing.

The only other option for germany is coal, and it takes a particulary ignorant green to see that preferable. Meanwhile up here in the nation of immovable bedrock we're finishing up the plans for the deep storage facility, the final solution to waste problems.
 
Last edited:
Nope do not agree - at least not for Ukania. Tidal barrages, Wave, Wind, "Clean coal", Gas, Oil - anything in-fact rather than the expensive and very dangerous 'Nuclear'.
 
Cobol74 said:
Nope do not agree - at least not for Ukania. Tidal barrages, Wave, Wind, "Clean coal", Gas, Oil - anything in-fact rather than the expensive and very dangerous 'Nuclear'.
Click to expand...

The tidal barrage/wave generators that don't work and require much expensive maintenance, wind that doesn't work most of the time, 'clean coal' that isn't and kills thousands of people a year, natural gas that can explode and take out half a county, and oil (which nobody actually uses to generate electricity with). Great options. Not.

Of course, if I believed the Brit scientists and their claim that the all-Brit AGR reactors were the most advanced and safe available, I might want to ban nuclear power too. Problem is, they are among the worst nuclear reactor designs ever, foisted off on the British people by a government that (at the time) refused to accept that there was any way some other country could do better.

The question for rational people isn't should we have nuclear power, but which type reactors should we use. I wouldn't want to live near an AGR, but I am more than happy with my neighbor, the PWR.

Edit: Basing your opinion of all nuclear power on the Brit nuclear establishment and their preferred designs is like basing your opinion of all cars off the former Brit auto establishment and saying that since the best car British Leyland was ever able to make was the Austin Allegro, all cars suck and should be banned.
 
Last edited:
Spectre said:
The tidal barrage/wave generators that don't work and require much expensive maintenance, wind that doesn't work most of the time, 'clean coal' that isn't and kills thousands of people a year, natural gas that can explode and take out half a county, and oil (which nobody actually uses to generate electricity with). Great options. Not.

Of course, if I believed the Brit scientists and their claim that the all-Brit AGR reactors were the most advanced and safe available, I might want to ban nuclear power too. Problem is, they are among the worst nuclear reactor designs ever, foisted off on the British people by a government that (at the time) refused to accept that there was any way some other country could do better.

The question for rational people isn't should we have nuclear power, but which type reactors should we use. I wouldn't want to live near an AGR, but I am more than happy with my neighbor, the PWR.
Click to expand...
Sorry your evidence for the failure of tidal is?

AGR is way out of date and should be discounted for current decision making (you have to see the AGR decision making in terms of the date i.e. 1950s), the one I thought that may be OK was the CANDU (Sp?) Canadian powerstation design but even then. ? that is why we are buying French. Now let me see 31 French reactors built by the French and run by Brits. ? No I do not think so either - Windscale anyone?

http://www.lakestay.co.uk/1957.htm

So good they changed the name of the place!!!! The Irish are pissed off about the place too, and who can blame them?


So to sum up Nuclear - no thanks.

Any way it is always the US that does everything best and refuses to learn from others (about anything).
 
Cobol74 said:
Sorry your evidence for the failure of tidal is?

AGR is way out of date and should be discounted for current decision making (you have to see the AGR decision making in terms of the date i.e. 1950s), the one I thought that may be OK was the CANDU (Sp?) Canadian powerstation design but even then. ? that is why we are buying French. Now let me see 31 French reactors built by the French and run by Brits. ? No I do not think so either - Windscale anyone?

http://www.lakestay.co.uk/1957.htm
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, Windscale, that old canard.

Windscale was *AIR COOLED* and *GRAPHITE MODERATED*. US scientists told you guys NOT to build them that way, for the reasons that the plant so nicely demonstrated. Your scientists and government didn't listen. Graphite burns *real* well. Windscale was an all-Brit show, displaying typical British arrogance.

Nobody else builds commercial reactors that way. Not even the Russians do any more.

Surprisingly the French do have some of the best civilian nuclear power designs in the world. Surely the Brits aren't too dumb to be trained to operate what's a mostly automated plant? :p

So good they changed the name of the place!!!! The Irish are pissed off about the place too, and who can blame them?


So to sum up Nuclear - no thanks.

Any way it is always the US that does everything best and refuses to learn from others (about anything).
Click to expand...

Erm, not so much. The Brits, French and Germans have Unwarranted Cultural Superiority Syndrome, often pretty bad. We have it too, but not quite to the same degree.

Meanwhile, the US is buying Norwegian anti-shipping missiles, German tank cannon and Belgian rifles (among other things) because we've determined that we *can't* do any better. If you want to see how bad the 'Buy British ONLY even if other designs are shown to work much better' syndrome is, you have only to look at the SA80/L85 basic infantry rifle. Not even Heckler and Koch could fix all the basic design screwups, your own forces desperately try to trade them off with US forces' M4/M16 types (or outright just 'borrow' some of our extras) when they get into a combat zone and can do so without anyone noticing, and when you sent some to Venezuela as free military aid in the 80s and 90s, Venezuela evaluated them, then sent most of them back and said 'no thanks, we don't want any more, not even free.' Despite extensive foreign military and police sales attempts, the only people that were willing to buy them was Jamaica, who uses them about as much as they do bobsleds.

As for tidal, it has been and at current technology levels continues to be an economic failure. Any profits made from the electrical generation are more than eaten by the constant maintenance the generation system needs. Seawater is horribly corrosive; who knew? And all it takes is a tsunami and your generating station is gone like it never existed. And before you say that Europe doesn't get tsunamis... Lisbon, 1755.
 
Last edited:
Spectre said:
Erm, not so much. The Brits, French and Germans have Unwarranted Cultural Superiority syndrome. We have it too, but not necessarily to the same degree.

Meanwhile, the US is buying Norwegian anti-shipping missiles, German tank cannon and Belgian rifles (among other things) because we've determined that we *can't* do any better. If you want to see how bad the 'Buy British ONLY even if other designs are shown to work much better' syndrome is, you have only to look at the SA80/L85 basic infantry rifle. Not even Heckler and Koch could fix all the basic design screwups, your own forces desperately try to trade them off with US forces' M4/M16 types (or outright just 'borrow' some of our extras) when they get into a combat zone and can do so without anyone noticing, and when you sent some to Venezuela as free military aid in the 80s and 90s, Venezuela evaluated them, then sent most of them back and said 'no thanks, we don't want any more, not even free.'
Click to expand...

Well, the SA80 came as a replacement to another rifle, the SLR. The SLR was a semi auto version of the FN FAL. Then again.. The SA80 wasn't really a good design.

But let's not forget that the Brits do have a very long history og making guns. While the gun culture isn't as prominent today, it's important to remember that the British have made some superb weaponry over the centuries. Including this one.
 
Bringing up the only meltdown in British nuclear history which occurred 54 years ago on a poorly designed and hastily built plant (due to an attempt to keep up with the Americans) as a reason for abandoning Nuclear completely in the 21st century is beyond stupid.

Tidal is expensive, completely unproven in the long term and each design comes with its own inherent faults.
 
Spectre said:
Erm, not so much. The Brits, French and Germans have Unwarranted Cultural Superiority syndrome. We have it too, but not necessarily to the same degree.

Meanwhile, the US is buying Norwegian anti-shipping missiles, German tank cannon and Belgian rifles (among other things) because we've determined that we *can't* do any better. If you want to see how bad the 'Buy British ONLY even if other designs are shown to work much better' syndrome is, you have only to look at the SA80/L85 basic infantry rifle. Not even Heckler and Koch could fix all the basic design screwups, your own forces desperately try to trade them off with US forces' M4/M16 types (or outright just 'borrow' some of our extras) when they get into a combat zone and can do so without anyone noticing, and when you sent some to Venezuela as free military aid in the 80s and 90s, Venezuela evaluated them, then sent most of them back and said 'no thanks, we don't want any more, not even free.'
Click to expand...
Woa there - do not think so.
The buy British thing is the MoD and that is a Political Schtick - like your Pork Barrells, defence contractors place their factories in 'Marginal seats' for political gain. I agree with you on the SA80, it was shit - rumour has it that the latest fix (by H&K I believe) has sorted it almost completely but I will not stand up for it as I could be wrong - still I will retort your M16 Version 1 with no cleaning kits and the wrong ammunition in Vietnam ('bang, bang, click, jam. ?) - no one gets it 100% right.

I refute you accusation in the general case. ...
Ukanians bought the best cars for the money (at the time Jap and German) and because ours were crap we do not have an industry anymore. Exactly the opposite of your point.
 
Cobol74 said:
Woa there - do not think so.
The buy British thing is the MoD and that is a Political Schtick - like your Pork Barrells, defence contractors place their factories in 'Marginal seats' for political gain. I agree with you on the SA80, it was shit - rumour has it that the latest fix (by H&K I believe) has sorted it almost completely but I will not stand up for it as I could be wrong - still I will retort your M16 Version 1 with no cleaning kits and the wrong ammunition in Vietnam ('bang, bang, click, jam. ?) - no one gets it 100% right.
Click to expand...

The difference is that we sorted out the M16 problems relatively quickly and replaced the defective weapons in service almost as fast as we could. Meanwhile, the British government denied for more than a decade that there were problems with the SA80 at all and that it was 'a superior weapon in all respects' when it demonstrably wasn't.

The H&K upgrades fixed *some* of the problems. Not even most. Just some. Among other remaining issues, it still has an alarming tendency to act like the safety is still on when you clearly have it set to 'off'.

I refute you accusation in the general case. ...
Ukanians bought the best cars for the money (at the time Jap and German) and because ours were crap we do not have an industry anymore. Exactly the opposite of your point.
Click to expand...

But your government at the time didn't. Still doesn't, in general.
 
Spectre said:
The difference is that we sorted out the M16 problems relatively quickly and replaced the defective weapons in service almost as fast as we could. Meanwhile, the British government denied for more than a decade that there were problems with the SA80 at all and that it was 'a superior weapon in all respects' when it demonstrably wasn't.

The H&K upgrades fixed *some* of the problems. Not even most. Just some. Among other remaining issues, it still has an alarming tendency to act like the safety is still on when you clearly have it set to 'off'.



But your government at the time didn't. Still doesn't, in general.
Click to expand...

What the Government does and what Ukanians do are two different things (as I explained MoD are our Pork Barrells) - you as a 'people' are far more in tune with what your government. How many Americans still buy an American car just because it is American and not the best car for their needs?

On the M16: my point was that you did not scrap the M16 and we are not going to scrap the SA80 and for exactly the same 'real' (as opposed to the given/good) reasons - not politically acceptable so to do. Yes your fix for the M16 worked pretty quickly (you were in the middle of a war after all) and the fix for the SA80 is debatable, give you that. Still when we do agree Mustang and the AV8B you get some good kit out of it.

I found this a book worth reading:

http://www.amazon.com/Lies-My-Teach...6281/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300235466&sr=8-1

Perhaps one does not agree with everything in it but an eye opener anyhow.
 
Last edited:
To be honest there have been very few nuclear accidents in the UK, especially considering several of the power stations were based upon 1950s weapon building sites. The majority of UK stations have been operating since the 1960s too, modern power stations are naturally going to feature safer designs.
Note that no major nuclear disaster has occurred at a new station, Chernobyl was an old poorly built station and even the Japanese plant dates from the 1970s.

In fact considering the amount of nuclear power station sites around the world compared to the fatalities they have caused they must be one of the safest sources of power?
 
AiR said:
Thats something we can agree upon, however I do not think we should read too much into Germanys temporary security review. There are important elections coming up in a country where the greens have influence, I see this as nothing more than political posturing.

The only other option for germany is coal, and it takes a particulary ignorant green to see that preferable. Meanwhile up here in the nation of immovable bedrock we're finishing up the plans for the deep storage facility, the final solution to waste problems.
Click to expand...


I really hope they don't bury the "Spent Rods" underground. Everytime the US has choosen a site, they find there is more water running through there than they expected, and have to start looking again. Even in the Utah desert.
 
The facts behind the decisions are all there albeit the english PDF seems to be broken now, it worked yesterday though. According to the analysis the likelyhood that the capsules will remain intact for the 1 million years time span the survey covers is great. Corrosion is being taken into account and buffers are implemented in the design. The bedrock has shown to be steady over a period of several billion years, so the 100 000 years that the fuel needs is accounted for with a huge margin.

I'm sure there are suitable places in the US too, but you have the issue of fault lines and earthquakes. We don't. As for the japanese situation, it's the fault of the japanese for building a powerplant in a risk area for tsunamis and earthquakes. The east coast with it's shallow tsunami-proof water is much more suitable. The fact that the plant design allowed for the complete loss of cooling due to the destruction of backup systems is of course even more serious. But to apply the japanese situation on nuclear power in general is the same as to apply the Banqiao dam break that killed 26 thousand people on hydropower in general. Poor design in both cases. Armed with the above and the Japanese dam break that occured due to the earthquake I could go on about how dangerous hydropower is (and it is, compared to nuclear) and how we should all ban all hydropower, but I won't because that would be as silly as wanting to ban all nuclear power.

Greenpeace was on the radio earlier, they were outside the SKB building protesting against the final storage, and their leader was apparently german. What is it with germans and their love of dirty coal power that currently supplies 61% of Germanys electricity... A protest against nuclear power have been called upon today in Stockholm, about 100 turned up, mostly old hippies. Meanwhile the public opinions support for nuclear stands firm.
 
Last edited:
AiR said:
I'm sure there are suitable places in the US too, but you have the issue of fault lines and earthquakes. We don't. As for the japanese situation, it's the fault of the japanese for building a powerplant in a risk area for tsunamis and earthquakes. The east coast with it's shallow tsunami-proof water is much more suitable. The fact that the plant design allowed for the complete loss of cooling due to the destruction of backup systems is of course even more serious. But to apply the japanese situation on nuclear power in general is the same as to apply the Banqiao dam break that killed 26 thousand people on hydropower in general. Poor design in both cases. Armed with the above and the Japanese dam break that occured due to the earthquake I could go on about how dangerous hydropower is (and it is, compared to nuclear) and how we should all ban all hydropower, but I won't because that would be as silly as wanting to ban all nuclear power.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the Sayano Shushenskaya accident either when talking about dangers of hydropower...
 
Air, they said the same thing about Yuka Mountain. It is still our only long term storage solution, although it is currently shutdown, but it is not a good one. There are several reasons that it is not, the geology is known to be created by volcanic activity is the main one. But there are still all sorts of water flow issues that are unkown.

And it is not 100,000 years, it is several hundred thousand years to become safe. Nobody can predict what will happen to anything underground for that time.
 
Oh look tidal power - which does not work - see posts above:

List (Oh look no American ones - why not I wonder?):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tidal_power_stations

The French story. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rance_Tidal_Power_Station

My favourite bit. ?

"In spite of the high development cost of the project, the costs have now been recovered, and electricity production costs are lower than that of nuclear power generation (1.8c per kWh, versus 2.5c per kWh for nuclear)."

So do I want to pay 1.8c or 2.5c for my electricity - let me see - um difficult one that. ? I know the cheap one. Trebles all around.

Also this one is 750 Mtrs long - how big will be the Severn estuary I wonder? Also surely it will just be multiples of the sets across the inlet, no new technology at all?

Well we are not doing it because of the eels - yes the eels, nothing to do with someone being in the pay of the nuclear lobby at all.
 
Last edited:
We all know such things work, just Spectre doesn't like so it is worthless and we get tired of arguing with him.

The DEA just did something worthwhile, they seized Georgia's entire supply of sodium thiopental, a drug used in lethal injection style executions. Those are the real killer drugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top