PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Uranium shortage poses threat
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7638

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Totally_Baffled wrote:
One of the things that I notice is that in debates people very rarely change their view.


That is the 2nd worst thing about politics in my opinion. Why is it so bad to be seen to change your mind? Watch any US news and "flip-flopping" is akin to child killing! Surely changing one's mind in light of further analysis, thought or new data is to be commended, no?
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Totally_Baffled



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2824
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

I tend to agree with Dr Bakhtiari, the recently retired senior adviser for the National Iranian Oil Company about some of the alternative fuels:


Hi Aurora

I was just making the overall point that I was conceding on the issue of nuclear power and the need to spend the money on more sustainable sources of energy.

I recognise and understand the issues with bio fuels I used the word "limited" in my previous post for that reason.

Totally_Baffled wrote:

Quote:
I now fully accept that actually, if we spent tens of billions on wave/wind/conservation/limited bio fuels/methanol/ethanol from sugar etc etc etc I would be more confident of acheiving much imporoved energy security and sustainability.


Quote:
Surely changing one's mind in light of further analysis, thought or new data is to be commended, no?


Agreed Chris.

People think that if they change their minds , they no longer have credibility.

But actually, It can show that someone has just done their homework, or as you say, new data has come to light.

I must admit I thought we could not do without nukes given our domestic FF dilemma, but then they were going to take 20 years even if they could get the finance.

In that time, its not unrealistic to acheive breakthroughs in the wave/wind/micro generating/conservation/ bio fuel areas.

They wont provide BAU, but at least once built they need little FF's (accept for maintenance) and they could last for decades upon decades...
_________________
TB

Peak oil? ahhh smeg..... Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7638

PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Radiation risk 'less significant'
Air pollution may be a bigger risk to health than exposure to radiation, such as that after the Chernobyl disaster, a study suggests. Researchers examined the health impact of the meltdown of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. They concluded the risks were probably no greater than those posed by obesity, smoking and urban pollution.

My general opinion is that the public's fear of radiation is exaggerated by unwarranted fear of the unknown and Hollywood. Don't misinterpret this as advocacy for anything nuclear, it isn't.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group