UK nuclear plans 'put energy in French hands'Government plans for nuclear power risk

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

To tell you the truth I don't know. Maybe that report is talking about early models, because I've seen some turning in very high winds.

No it is a fact ,there are serious limitations with wind turbines in high winds simply because of the enormous stresses generated even at operational speeds .That is not to say they don't serve a purpose though ,they can supplement a small percentage of the national grid but will never replace traditional power stations as nuclear generation can do and it is very short sighted of any government to think so

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

No it is a fact ,there are serious limitations with wind turbines in high winds simply because of the enormous stresses generated even at operational speeds .That is not to say they don't serve a purpose though ,they can supplement a small percentage of the national grid but will never replace traditional power stations as nuclear generation can do and it is very short sighted of any government to think so

Which is why we need to explore alternatives, like wave pawer, tidal power, geothermal, etc...

Do you know how much of the UK could be made uninhabitable by a disaster at one of our nuclear power stations? Where would the population from that area go??

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Which is why we need to explore alternatives, like wave pawer, tidal power, geothermal, etc...

Do you know how much of the UK could be made uninhabitable by a disaster at one of our nuclear power stations? Where would the population from that area go??

Indeed we do need to explore alternatives i agree ,but we need new sources of power generation now not in 20-30 yrs or more .Actually we needed it 20 yrs ago but the governments of the time didn't see the urgency .Serious research should have been done on tidal ,wind ,solar, etc long before now and maybe then we wouldn't be stuck with a half developed technology that cannot generate our power requirements and we wouldn't be faced with the risk vs reward choice we now face with nuclear power.I agree that a accident on the scale of chernobyl would be catastrophic for the UK but ,because of our shortsightedness we have have i feel left ourselves with no other choice .

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

Indeed we do need to explore alternatives i agree ,but we need new sources of power generation now not in 20-30 yrs or more .Actually we needed it 20 yrs ago but the governments of the time didn't see the urgency .Serious research should have been done on tidal ,wind ,solar, etc long before now and maybe then we wouldn't be stuck with a half developed technology that cannot generate our power requirements and we wouldn't be faced with the risk vs reward choice we now face with nuclear power.I agree that a accident on the scale of chernobyl would be catastrophic for the UK but ,because of our shortsightedness we have have i feel left ourselves with no other choice .

Apart from the fact that we still have plenty of coal

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Apart from the fact that we still have plenty of coal

which is getting harder to get as this proves

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...?newsfeed=true

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

which is getting harder to get as this proves

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...?newsfeed=true

There were loads of pits that were closed down by Maggie, that still had loads of coal left.

She destroyed the British coal industry because she wanted to destroy the NUM.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

There were loads of pits that were closed down by Maggie, that still had loads of coal left.

She destroyed the British coal industry because she wanted to destroy the NUM.

I'm not going to get into a argument about the rights and wrongs of pit closures suffice it say in the hear and now re opening pits isn't an option that can be seriously considered for a multitude of reasons

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

I'm not going to get into a argument about the rights and wrongs of pit closures suffice it say in the hear and now re opening pits isn't an option that can be seriously considered for a multitude of reasons

I've got no intention of getting into an argument about it. I'm just saying that there is plenty of coal still there.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

I've got no intention of getting into an argument about it. I'm just saying that there is plenty of coal still there.

which is effectively un useable so therefore not an option worth considering

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

which is effectively un useable so therefore not an option worth considering

Well that's another discussion entirely