Comments on: Nuclear: annoy a few people a lot, rather than mildly inconveniencing the many http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/ At the intersection of the EU, UK politics and tech Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:21:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Devil's Kitchen http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/comment-page-1/#comment-79584 Devil's Kitchen Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:20:28 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/#comment-79584 Jon, I'm sorry but wind power is simply not an option: it just doesn't provide enough stable power. Solar power might be economically feasible (coupled with some new research into lithium ion batteries) in a decade, but it will take an awful lot longer before it is providing the power that we need. Nuclear fission is the only feasible option currently (assuming that you believe in CO2 driven climate change which, as you probably know, I don't). I do believe that we will see the first industrial-size fusion generator within 20 years, but we are going to have to bridge the gap somehow. Mary, even with the building materials taken into account, nuclear is reasonably low-emission. See Worstall for more: http://timworstall.com/2008/01/10/careful-here/ DK Jon,

I’m sorry but wind power is simply not an option: it just doesn’t provide enough stable power.

Solar power might be economically feasible (coupled with some new research into lithium ion batteries) in a decade, but it will take an awful lot longer before it is providing the power that we need.

Nuclear fission is the only feasible option currently (assuming that you believe in CO2 driven climate change which, as you probably know, I don’t).

I do believe that we will see the first industrial-size fusion generator within 20 years, but we are going to have to bridge the gap somehow.

Mary, even with the building materials taken into account, nuclear is reasonably low-emission.

See Worstall for more: http://timworstall.com/2008/01/10/careful-here/

DK

]]> By: Mary http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/comment-page-1/#comment-79546 Mary Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:02:44 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/#comment-79546 I agree with you, although suspect I am more anti-nuclear than you (I don't think we should decommission early but I'm not convinced we should be building more until someone solves the waste issue. Also, the carbon footprint of construction - all that extra thick concrete... - should be factored in to the true cost of building more generators, and isn't) but I don't know what I find more depressing: the government's pathetic subservience to the nuclear lobby or my realisation that the loathsome (smug, elitist) Zac Goldsmith was the only person talking sense about this issue on Newsnight the other night (the need for serious investment in energy efficiency, possibilities of CHP, the fact that it is too late to pin our hopes on nuclear power to tackle climate change). Why is there no one in British politics making a serious case for environmental justice as part of a social justice agenda (and not just a consumer lifestyle choice for old Etonians)? I agree with you, although suspect I am more anti-nuclear than you (I don’t think we should decommission early but I’m not convinced we should be building more until someone solves the waste issue. Also, the carbon footprint of construction – all that extra thick concrete… – should be factored in to the true cost of building more generators, and isn’t) but I don’t know what I find more depressing: the government’s pathetic subservience to the nuclear lobby or my realisation that the loathsome (smug, elitist) Zac Goldsmith was the only person talking sense about this issue on Newsnight the other night (the need for serious investment in energy efficiency, possibilities of CHP, the fact that it is too late to pin our hopes on nuclear power to tackle climate change). Why is there no one in British politics making a serious case for environmental justice as part of a social justice agenda (and not just a consumer lifestyle choice for old Etonians)?

]]> By: Jon http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/comment-page-1/#comment-79397 Jon Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:48:10 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/#comment-79397 Ah, I'm with you on that one with fusion... But in terms of nuclear (fission) and what the government is proposing in the UK the figures do not add up in terms of when the power is needed, and I think the argument is false. Plus, unlike France that has invested in nuclear for decades, the UK does have other options. Ah, I’m with you on that one with fusion…

But in terms of nuclear (fission) and what the government is proposing in the UK the figures do not add up in terms of when the power is needed, and I think the argument is false. Plus, unlike France that has invested in nuclear for decades, the UK does have other options.

]]> By: Emmanuel http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/comment-page-1/#comment-79396 Emmanuel Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:41:51 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/nuclear-annoy-a-few-people-a-lot-rather-than-mildly-inconveniencing-the-many/#comment-79396 Jon, je ne suis pas sûr que poser le problème de la sorte corresponde à la réalité: toutes les réformes visant aux économies d'énergie ou au développement des énergies durables, même drastiques, ne suffiront pas à remplacer les centrales nucléaires, et particulièrement à un moment où l'Europe a besoin de renforcer son indépendance énergétique. En revanche, il me semble qu'il vaudrait mieux investir beaucoup plus dans la fusion nucléaire (que nous ne maîtrisons pas bien, mais qui produit plus d'énergie et moins de déchets) que dans de nouvelles centrales nucléaires classiques (utilisant la fission). Jon, je ne suis pas sûr que poser le problème de la sorte corresponde à la réalité: toutes les réformes visant aux économies d’énergie ou au développement des énergies durables, même drastiques, ne suffiront pas à remplacer les centrales nucléaires, et particulièrement à un moment où l’Europe a besoin de renforcer son indépendance énergétique.

En revanche, il me semble qu’il vaudrait mieux investir beaucoup plus dans la fusion nucléaire (que nous ne maîtrisons pas bien, mais qui produit plus d’énergie et moins de déchets) que dans de nouvelles centrales nucléaires classiques (utilisant la fission).

]]>