Hinkley C progress

Saw something on the TV about Hinckley C.
They are about to pour the concrete on one of the rafts that will support one of the reactors.
I'm sure I heard that they will use 3 million tonnes of concrete altogether. That'll need a few carbon credits to counteract all that CO2.
Also, why the obsession with eye protection ?.
Two of the people being interviewed were wearing specs and had those cheap 'safety glasses' over the top, despite the fact that nothing dangerous was happening while they were filming.
They are still claiming that it will be up and running in 2025.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 15:49:28 +0000, Andrew

I was told once that ordinary spectacles would give almost the same protection as safety glasses face on, but safety goggles provide more protection for anything coming from the periphery.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 16:00, Scott wrote:

The sums are out there on Google, IIRC lifetime budget is less than 10% of any thermal plant. An equivalent coal fired plant would burn a million and a half tons of coal a year.

Didn't see that piece yet, but eye protection and more tends to be mandatory on most industrial sites these days. There's a "red line" on civil nuclear sites, the only place outside tends to be the canteen and admin buildings. Over the "red line" you need to wear hard hat, safety shoes, hi-vis, eye protection and sometimes boiler suit too. And carry gloves and ear protection.
The "over the glasses" plastic eye protection doesn't even provide much side cover. Of course glasses used to be glass, not plastic.
I'll confess to relying on ordinary glasses for most workshop jobs including light angle grinding. I use a visor over glasses rather than safety glasses if there are a lot of sparks flying.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 16:00, Scott wrote:

wouldn't want broken glass in you eye would you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 16:54, critcher wrote:

Glasses are normally plastic these days
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 17:22, newshound wrote:

Glasses of low power can have lenses made of plastic, anything over a few dioptre are going to be glass or they're going to be inordinately thick.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fredxx wrote:

1.74 index plastic makes quite a difference, my worst eye (-6.25 I think) has a lens that's 'only' 4-5mm thick.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 17:30, Andy Burns wrote:

https://www.framesdirect.com/eyeglasses/lens-options-hi-index.html
Suggests yours are glass. Where did you get yours from?
Plastic also has greater dispersion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fredxx wrote:

It's decades since I had glass glasses, they're definitely plastic, and with titanium frames (one pair with rim, the other rimless) they practically float off your nose.
I gather 1.76 is also available.
<http://www.tokaioptical.co.uk/176-the-worlds-thinnest-lens.html > Where did you get yours from?
Specsavers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 17:24, Fredxx wrote:

It seems taht glasses and plastics all have refractive indices of around 1.5, so basically er - bollocks?
--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I used to love getting out a set of crayons to show chromatic aberration in full colour. ;-)
Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
snipped-for-privacy@cdixon.me.uk
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 17:24, Fredxx wrote:

Not actually true.
Some lenses are convex and thick at the edges, some are thin at the edges so weigh far less. Also some plastics have a refractive index of 1.7 glass can be as low as 1.5.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That hasn’t been true for a long time now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 16:00, Scott wrote:

My 70-yo neighbour is a retired MOT tester/mechanic and does lots of welding and angle-grinding on his drive.
He only wears ondinary specs, except when he is welding, when he might use his UV-resistant gear.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 15:49, Andrew wrote:

I see you have never seen a wind turbine base being cast.
1000 tonnes of concrete is average for a megawatt.
So for 9GW capacity (*about 3Gw average output, same as Hinkly thats 9 million tonnes of wind turbine bases.
And you still need 3GW of gas turbine for when te wind dont blow.

Should be unless people like you find a way to scupper it.
--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 15:49:28 +0000, Andrew

So that they're less easily identified in the street and harassed by greenies? :-)
--

Chris

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 16:43, Nightjar wrote:

except they work (sort of), while the EU system is yet to generate anypower, anywhere.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 17:47, Andrew wrote:

Not true, the first Chinese EPR was on grid in June, the second being not far behind.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Seems a long time to me. What are they messing about at? grin. Brian
--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/11/2018 19:56, Brian Gaff wrote:

Quietly ramping up existing electricty unit costs to see how far they can go before the public start rioting and becoming mass refuseniks (those that avoided a smart meter that is).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.