OT Nuclear power

Ah. This fellow. Seems to be pretty self serving.

See previous link. It's for everything. Until the price goes up some more of course..

Is it really that difficult for you to understand the difference between the legacy of a nuclear programme that was primarily aimed at developing weapons and future nuclear power, where the cost of decommissioning is already factored into the costs?

Doesn't the fact that nobody here agrees with you ever make you doubt?

Colin Bignell

I gave him the clue in nice easy words but it still whooshed him. Thick as s*it in the neck of a bottle, our harry.

Is it really that difficult for you to understand that all "nuclear activity" produces waste? And that it is all in temporary containment because successive governments are/have been unwilling to shoulder the costs/ political damage involved in a permanent solution? And that any solution will involve vast cost and may fail. (As have some attempts elsewhere).

And finally there's whinging bastards here don't even want a wind turbine. Any repository should be put under their house. Or their electricity cut off.

If the problem was a s simple as some simple minded people here think, it would not be an issue and would have been dealt with years ago. Instead it has been repeatedly booted into the long grass.

You could remove the word nuclear from that and still be accurate. However, you have avoided the question. Can you not see the difference between decommissioning a nuclear programme that was rushed through to meet a deadline to explode an H-Bomb, with little concern about safety and none about decommissioning, and a new one where the decommissioning is already factored into the costs, even before it is built?

Cost, rather than any political damage. Storage is cheap compared to a consumer reactor.

Cost that, like decommissioning, is already factored in before the new plant is built.

No system is aver 100% safe, but the nuclear industry, particularly in Britain, is significantly safer than any other.

If I lived in a geologically suitable area, it wouldn't worry me. Unlike you, I am not unreasonably afraid of radiation. After all, I am sitting here emitting around 2,000 gamma rays a second.

As I keep pointing out, it is only an issue to you. As I asked before, doesn't the fact that nobody here agrees with you ever make you doubt?

Colin Bignell