Hinkley Nuclear Power Plant - how do you feel about it?

[AnandaTimeIn]

I don't live in UK - not far though, and visit a lot - but I am quite worried about this....

After Fukushima, and the report that radiation from it is leaking into the sea...

Do "they" really think this is going to be cheaper/better?! What about our health?!

How did this get through without a murmur from the public.
Seems a done deal with Chinese investment...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24604218

yeghoulsandlittledevils

hamster I am not saying it's a good idea, just stating facts. Russian gas, at present, is be far the cheapest option and some (German) public pressure pushes for this over France's nuclear energy or fossil fuel burning.

How silly of them.

Unfortunately, building defences to withstand a tsunami on British nuclear power stations to appease public opinion puts the price up and makes the carbon footprint of building the things a good deal less attractive. But nuclear is still the best option, unless we want to go without heat and light and have it rationed by the government.

The price has quadrupled in ten years, thanks to green-backed regulatory red tape. And if the green movement wasn't so keen to lie through its teeth to people about the evils of nuclear (and if the British people looked at an actual map to work out how unlikely it is they'd be hit by a fricking tsunami), then people like me wouldn't have to spend their lives beating people with a Bat of Clue.

How silly of them.

Quite. Gas is a fossil fuel, after all, and the first one we'll run out of. It is just sold cheap. For now.

If you're going to peddle propoganda at least make it at least partly factual.
Given that the link you put up earlier in the thread DoctorTwo actually disproved your argument, perhaps you should be more careful about what propaganda you use as well.

I agree with nuclear power, lets face it we would have to cover half the country with wind turbines for an effect, though the foreign investment leaves me cold.

yeghoulsandlittledevils

Quite. Gas is a fossil fuel, after all, and the first one we'll run out of. It is just sold cheap. For now.

Even if it only lasts 50 years, that'll be time for us to come up with something new.

According to NASA, coal and gas are way more harmful than nuclear energy - article here

"despite the three major nuclear accidents the world has experienced, nuclear power prevented an average of over 1.8 million net deaths worldwide between 1971-2009 (see Fig. 1). This amounts to at least hundreds and more likely thousands of times more deaths than it caused. An average of 76,000 deaths per year were avoided annually between 2000-2009"

I think I'll go with the nuclear option and keep the lights on.

Even if it only lasts 50 years, that'll be time for us to come up with something new.

Trouble is we aren't though are we FPH ?

Like all the billions we're not investing in thorium power that was highly successfully demonstrated in the 50s and 60s.

The other thing is that oil is not so easily substitutable.