this new nuclear reactor in Somerset?

[OoozingCervix]

How is something that produces dangerous waste, that needs storing for half a million years, a good idea?

[Sallyingforth]

This new station is only going to replace the existing one that will close down. So it's not going to increase the overall capacity.
We need more power stations, urgently, ur we'll not have enough electricity at any price.
Wind is unreliable and far too expensive. It has to be nuclear, or the lights will go out.

[MammaTJ]

I live in the area this is being built in.

I do not agree with the terms that have been agreed but they have been accepted because our area is in need of decent employment. The local council is bankrupt, the local economy is as bad as a lot of places and worse than some.

Quite frankly, we need it.

[Ionlywantitall]

things the fact that London will benefit from it a hell of a lot more than a nuclear free Ireland.

Admittedly like many Irish people who have endured the hangover of Windscale/Sellafield, I am very anti nuclear.....

[JerseySpud]

Ionly you think thats bad. Try living in Jersey. the French built one on their cost. If theirs goes boom say good bye to most of our population according to the locals.

We have a siren thats tested every week because of it.

Fuck knows what we are actually meant to do tbh because its not like we could get off the island in a hurry!

[BakerStreetSaxRift]

I thought if one went boom then the whole of the UK would go byebye, not just those in the locality of the plant?

[junkfoodaddict]

It's either a nuclear power station or nothing I'm afraid. Bills are increasing because the energy SUPPLIERS are profiting and energy sources are running low (despite us having nearly 300 years supply of coal beneath our feet).Energy manufacturers (the power stations) are NOT profitting from the price increase. Wind power is unreliable. During the winters of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010, win turbines in a particular area of the East DID NOT turn at all therefore produced no electricity at a time of greater need whereas a nearby coal power station produced electricity that was needed to see us through. Wind power is okay WHEN there is wind but a massive supply of the turbines is needed to match the energy needs of the country.
Sadly, the media reported that there would be energy shortages and poer cuts from around 2015 due to the number of coal power stations being taken out of service and not replaced. This unfortunately is TRUE, WILL happen and may happen as early as next year.
My DH work in a power station and we already have a generator plugged into our home for this very reason, in fact, lots of power station employees are doing the same. Working in the business, you KNOW what exactly is going to happen!
Unfortunately, no matter what sort of energy producer you want to build/create, you will ALWAYS get opposition who do not want it on their back door. You have the 'green' folk who are opposed to Nuclear and Coal and the 'country bumpkins' who oppose wind turbines and solar panels because they are a blot on the landscape.
Nuclear Power has been providing us with energy for over half a century with no problems to society. I think some people are hung up on the Japanese Nuclear Disaster that they make immediate links with our country. The main difference is we are not in a high risk area for tsunamis or earthquakes!!!
I don't believe wind power is efficient enough to provide us with our needs but I don't oppose them being built on my back field! if you want the energy you are going to have to accept that it comes with some things that you may not like or agree with.

[junkfoodaddict]

Biomass does work but it isn't very green and it is terrible to store. I KNOW!!!

[MadameOvary]

I know someone who works for EDF, in a nuclear power station. They are on a good wage and have a strong union. They get a cost-of-living increase every year and overtime is frequently available. From the point of view of much-needed employment, I'm all for it.
Oh and it's safe too. Took a while to get past my "growing-up-in-the-80's-nuclear-means-apocalypse" mindset, but I'd work there.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

Those of us who are a bit older think about Chernobyl and Windscale and Three Mile Island.
Engineers will always claim that everything is so much super safer than it used to be, those sort of accidents won't happen again. We aren't suddenly immune to those issues - accidents happen, design improvements are made.
But we are going to be really struggling for electricity soon and we do need reliable power sources. Climate change is a reality and so we can't rely on co2 emitting power plants.

I dunno what the answer is. I suspect many politicians don't either hence one reason for the dithering that has got us into this mess.

Junkfood, tell me more about your genny please.

[SuperStrength]

EDF is 85% owned by the french Government

[ontheallotment]

nuclear is the safest sort of electricity by far if you look at accident statistics per amount electricity generated. Coal and hydro are both dreadful in comparison.

It's very well regulated, provides a much needed reliable base supply and doesn't generate CO2.

The question really is, why have we left it so late to start new nuclear, we could have done with these new reactors starting up a decade sooner than they will.

[TheTruffleHunter]

Umm, slightly on the fence here.. instinctively opposed to nuclear power in general but think this is the least worst option. We need more power for the future, not least cos wind farms are pretty unreliable and cost almost as much (in terms of power) to set up and keep running. Does anyone here really want to reopen and send their own DH down a coal mine in the UK? We have plenty of Hydro stations here in the Highlands and I'm pro tidal power stations, but we really need to be realistic don't we?

[Degustibusnonestdisputandem]

Thorium reactors!

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

They are massively safer and cleaner than the type of reactor most commonly used at the moment; I cannot understand why this is not being developed (too many vested interests, I suppose...)

[Degustibusnonestdisputandem]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

[sashh]

Admittedly like many Irish people who have endured the hangover of Windscale/Sellafield, I am very anti nuclear

Windscale and sellafield are not the same thing are they? Someone will come along and correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the former was a reactor and the latter is a reprocessing plant.

[PatoBanton]

I don't think we should have anything that we are unable to control if something goes wrong.

end of

[ontheallotment]

better sell your car then panto (assuming you have one)

[justmatureenough2bdad]

the "double cost" thing is essentially bollocks. yes, EDF have been guaranteed a unit cost double what it is currently...but for 2023. The principle being that in 10 years time, after usual power cost increase, inflation and general cost of living increase, the cost of fuel will, in fact, be double what it currently is, in 10 years time

[MinesAPintOfTea]

I think its a great idea and live a couple of miles from a contentious power line area. I think the objections to that are laughable, the "unspoilt natural landscape" includes such beauties as the M5 and an industrial area.

[PatoBanton]

Yes how funny, I had better sell my car.

[Ionlywantitall]

sashh I wish, fancy pants renaming after the first fire, the policy then changed to lying about leaks. But the basic bones of the plant has been up and running (and leaking) since the 1950s.

But as long as people have jobs who care about the effects of faulty nuclear reactors!

[sparechange]

Erm, does everyone realise there is already a nuclear reactor on that site?
All the doom mongering is kind of irrelevant.

Plus, I went to a school trip there and it was supercool!

[ontheallotment]

it's inflation linked actually, but energy costs seem to go up by more than inflation. Problem is nobody knows what energy costs will be in 10 years time, let alone 35 years after that, so double todays prices seems a good deal to me. It's about the same (maybe slightly less) than onshore wind and much cheaper than offshore wind, and more reliable. For a pay later deal, the government has done pretty well imo.

[ontheallotment]

I was being serious pato, cars are much more dangerous than nuclear reactors, you can't control them when things go wrong. Look at the stats.