This forum is in read-only mode for archive purposes, please use our new forum at https://community.justflight.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Just Chat > Just Chat - General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 'No hold up' anticipated from UK nuclear
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

'No hold up' anticipated from UK nuclear

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 'No hold up' anticipated from UK nuclear
    Posted: 18 May 2011 at 9:02am
Over to you Pointy. Big%20smile
 
 
Quote

A safety review of the UK's nuclear industry, to be released on Wednesday, is expected to give a broad all-clear to current reactors and future plans.

Energy and Climate Secretary Chris Huhne commissioned the report in the wake of the Fukushima crisis in Japan.

Chief nuclear installations inspector Mike Weightman is expected to raise issues that should be explored further but will not affect new-build plans.

Estimates of the Fukushima compensation costs run to $100bn (£61bn).

But the Weightman report is expected to conclude that events resulting in a similar scale of damage are unlikely in the UK.

Hinckley%20Point%20power%20station Most of the UK's reactors have been built on coastal sites, raising fears about flooding
 
 
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 May 2011 at 1:58pm
No surprise! They are mad fools. They have written a report to fit preconceived conclusions.

Fukushima was allegedly an "advanced plant" in "an advanced economy" where things couldn't possibly go wrong. Now that illusion has been shattered they are saying "it was old plant" and "it was an old design" and are back-pedaling like hell to try and find any reason why we should still go with nuclear.

The fact that both Germany and Japan are stopping new nuclear plants should be a sign to the idiots in Parliament that we should not be pursuing nuclear.

No-one has said yet that the Pacific is massively contaminated with radiation, and are not talking about the disaster that was avoided simply because the wind was blowing out to sea.

As it is, because the radiation was blown out to sea, they have largely ignored the radiation threat because few people will be immediately affected. All the focus is on the plant itself and the surrounding area. They have also ignored the fact that despite the wind being in the opposite direction a large part of the time, that it still affected inland Japan on a massive scale (particularly to the north west).

You may be interested to note that we are running two of our reactors with damaged graphite moderators, and there is an intense monitoring program in place. The damage was serious enough to warrant its own report several years ago when it was discovered by accident (they didn't think it could occur so rapidly).

http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/releases/hinkleyb.htm

Note that it took a FoI request to get the information!!!!!!

Quote Assessment of revised safety case for operation of Hinkley Point B and (text removed)

JUST WHAT ARE THEY COVERING UP?! Whilst they have this mentality they should not be permitted to run these places!! TRANSPARENCY IS CRITICAL. If they have things to hide, we obviously have things we need to be worried about. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR SECRECY IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

What are all the black lines about? Where is the other plant that isn't being named? WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO HIDE???





Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 May 2011 at 5:12pm
Fukushima was allegedly an "advanced plant" in "an advanced economy" where things couldn't possibly go wrong.
 
I have my reservations about nuclear, but to be fair...  they were  an old, dodgy design, and in hindsight they did have many deficiencies? No reason why our new plants should be like that. And we don't have tsunamis and earthquakes to worry about.
 
As for our existing plants, I hadn't heard about that.
Back to Top
allardjd View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command


Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: Florida - USA
Points: 4506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote allardjd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 May 2011 at 5:32pm

Quote Fukushima was allegedly an "advanced plant" in "an advanced economy" where things couldn't possibly go wrong.

Fukushima was a 55 year old design, built 40 years ago, but supposedly still met the requirements of its operating license.

Who ever said "...things couldn't possibly go wrong"?

Anyone who says that is stupid or deceitful.  Anyone who believes it is beyond stupid.

John Allard
Back to Top
Slopey View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar
AirHauler Developer

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
Points: 8280
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slopey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 May 2011 at 11:52pm
Vulcan - it's quite obvious that what they are covering up in that extract are dates.

You do NOT want a bunch of protesters or people who wish your country ill to know when various maintenance cycles in a nuclear facility will take place, for a huge variety of reasons which I will not go into here. Anyone who has worked in the nuclear industry (especially the things-that-go-boom department) are aware of the lock downs, protest days, protest camps etc which are a huge inconvenience to day to day operations (so much so that the protestors actually "book" their protests in some places along with the operator to minimise disruption) - so it's beneficial to remove dates on documents so protests can't be organised, and also retrospectively to stop the conspiracy theorists (i.e. you) putting two and two together and getting eight hundred and seventy three point four.

If you think this document is an example of non-transparency, you're so far off the mark it's a good job you've never seen a proper controlled document. You'd likely go into shock.
AirHauler Developer
For AH2 queries - PLEASE USE THE EA Forums as the first port of call.
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 May 2011 at 12:13am
Quote it's quite obvious that what they are covering up in that extract are dates.

Some are dates, but others are referring to another plant, but we don't know which one.

Quote it's a good job you've never seen a proper controlled document.

Don't assume you know me.

Quote so it's beneficial to remove dates on documents ... to stop the conspiracy theorists (i.e. you).

What a crock! It would do nothing to stop that!

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down