Dithering Labour make me puke!! Surely we need 15-20 Nuclear power plants before the lights go out? Green

Question

supporters are just not being practical....they say let have a million wind turbines but nobody wants them built in their back yard...do they?....they say lets use wave power across the seven estuary...but the other half are against because wading birds have nowhere to go...I say s***w them...they should be planting trees instead of talking b ollacks we need more nuclear now....don't we?

Answer 1

You're right, you only have to do the maths to see the inevitability of it, no matter how green your intentions. But no government can think more than four years ahead!

Answer 2

Lets put the wading birds on a treadmill and use that to generate power.

Answer 3

i'm not against that

as a keen environmentalist and member of wildlife groups, i dispise the whole global warming claptrap - we should start protecting our environment, stop building houses, and have our own energy supply again, otherwise political/economic power is going to go out of our reach

so yes, a few nuclear plants and investments in our environmetal infrastructure would be great

Answer 4

I am a bit new to this but did Labour not propose the nuclear power stations but were shot down by people from all parties. I thought that the nuclear issue was 50/50. I am personally in favour of nuclear power. But like the windmills nobody wants in their back garden what do you think people will say when the government wants to build a nuclear power station anywhere near them.

I think they will say F**K off.

There is not many places you could build a nuclear power station without there being riots & there would be riots. Like you said everyone is in favour of it but nobody wants it in thier back garden.

You mean the old nuclear sites I take it. Well they are very few. If you you think people will tolerate an old coal power station being turned into a nuclear power station think again. Didcot in oxford is right next door to a massive residential area. It would be out of the question. I imagine France are ahead because they planed it decades ago. Quite simply we are planning it now. As I said I agree with nuclear power. I think it is the only way forward. I am no fan of Labour but what do you really think think the conservatives will do. They will follow the same path as Labour & it will probably be a good 10 years before we even get the go ahead for one station let a lone 20.

Answer 5

Perhaps, but remember that everything depends on economics in the end. A pound of nucleur fuel might produce the energy of several megatons of coal, but it may only be a couple hundred thousand dollars cheaper. The power plant spends twice this much on duct tape and toilet paper every year. Like coal, nucleur fuel is a non-renewable resource, unless one happens to have a supernova in their back yard. One fact nobody talks about is the fact we will run out of nucleur fuel long before we run out of coal. Then again, perhaps this is a good thing, because if all power was nucleur generated, there would soon come a point where nations would have to begin to dismantle their nucleur arsenals in order to use their warheads as nucleur fuel to generate power and instead of politics.