Fracking in Sheffield?

[I1L2T3]

Not Fukishama but France, where they generate about 80% of their national electricity that way. Why is that "stupid" as you claim?

 

And they're looking to phase it out to an extent. A lot of the plants they have are old, and many of them have had to be upgraded post-Fukushima because of safety concerns. They are also concerned about security of their uranium supplies and are conducting a quasi-colonial conflict

 

Decomissioning costs per plant approx 1bn EURO. Long-term storage costs to be added on top. Then spend on replacement generating capacity.

 

50 years of power. Hundreds of years of pain. No thought for generations to follow.

 

---------- Post added 04-08-2013 at 21:35 ----------

 

I never said any of those as well you know, and have no interest in discussing this with someone prepared to lie with the mendacity that you displaying.

 

Yes you did.

 

You said:

"You mean a plant that despite suffering an earthquake way beyond design parameters, and then being flooded by an tsunami way above design parameters"

 

as a defence of the Fukushima safety record.

 

Three of the cores exploded or caught fire and still have no containment and are still spewing crap into the environment. Do you get what that means?

 

You said nobody had died. Ok. Do you now accept that people will die because of the disaster? If so I'm wondering where on earth does that leave your argument? Should you have said 'nobody has died yet?' Do you think?

[Obelix]

I refer you to the answer given in post 320. When you apologise for that I will consider continuing the debate.

[I1L2T3]

I refer you to the answer given in post 320. When you apologise for that I will consider continuing the debate.

 

I've got nothing at all to apologise for.

 

Refer back to your own posts:

 

#300 where you champion the safety of the Fukushima plant. The reality is it's still barely under control. Still leaking. Two years on.

 

#309 where you say nobody has died. I ask again did you mean nobody has died yet? And if so how do you know how many people will die? I certainly wouldn't claim to know. I won't be alive for long enough to find out anyway but I can certainly believe that the death toll could be very significant. But hey, if it's safe why not just let the 150,000+ evacuees back into their homes in the exclusion zone?

[Obelix]

I refer you to the answer given in post 320.

[I1L2T3]

I refer you to the answer given in post 320.

 

There is absolutely no way I'm going to apologise for challenging you over your errors.

 

Have a banana and chill out. Maybe even eat a truckload of bananas if it helps. In front of the fire.

 

Or let's talk about fracking. More specifically, and this is very important, the approach of big business to environmental safety and transparency.

[Cyclone]

I don't have time to talk about Fukuishima and how it performed so well, but I did hear an interesting Radio 4 program last night.

 

The oil industry has contributed 300 Billion in tax revenue over the last 30 years.

 

That's before any indirect economic affects are considered, such as paying thousands of people and supporting an entire supply chain industry, which also pays direct tax and employs people.

 

This is the money that has benefited the entire country. No matter how it was spent, wasted or otherwise, without it the government would have had less to spend, and we would have all had to pay more tax, or settle for less being spent on public services.

[mort]

Back on topic please

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Kent had an extensive coalfield so the drilling for oil and gas in the south shouldn't be a problem, eh?

Er, there's no necessary association between the presence of:

a. coal; and

b. oil/gas

[I1L2T3]

Er, there's no necessary association between the presence of:

a. coal; and

b. oil/gas

 

Yes Jeffrey that is the point.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Yes Jeffrey that is the point.

Good. So maybe your suggestion re drilling there was unfounded.