Climate Change thread

[retep]

10 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Question for all wanna be Greta Thunbergs on here......

 

Bearing in mind the eye watering power bills that people are expecting (which many simply cannot afford), plus the possibility of power cuts if the wind doesn't blow or the rain does not replenish Norwegian Hydro reservoirs (or whatever), would you support reopening (or keeping open) some of the UK's coal fired power stations ? :

 

1 - No

2 - Yes but only for a limited period (and if so how long)

3 - Yes

This is due to listening to the Greta's on here and around the world.

Fracking should have been started immediately and coal fired power stations and pits kept open until the UK  became self sufficient.

[ads36]

6 hours ago, Dromedary said:

It may be cleaner but it certainly is not cheap and with it also comes environmental problem from radiation and how to deal with the waste.

the costs seem high, because we've been decommissioning the first generation of power plants, they were never designed with this work in mind, so it's difficult =  expensive.

 

new reactors have the decommissioning built in from the start = much cheaper.

 

the waste takes up very little space, it is contained, and can be safely stored. Yes, this will likely mean burying it. After a few hundred years it's no more radioactive than the rock you're burying it under.

Compare with the waste from fossil fuels, which isn't contained, and causes it's own problems. 

 

Not least, the ash from burning coal is radioactive, but we ignore that, it's fine, apparently.

[hauxwell]

It’s been on the news this morning that we are bringing in gas from Australia in tankers. How will that affect the carbon footprint, bringing it all the way from there?

 

Surely it would be better to look for gas and oil in the Uk until this energy crisis is over and we are more prepared to tackle climate change.

 

[ads36]

moving stuff by boat is  easy, it's about the most efficient way to do it.

 

(I can easily move a 20tonne Narrow boat by hand)

 

there are some uk deposits of gas/oil/coal:

• none of them can be brought on line quick enough to help
• none of them are big enough to affect the global price - the extracted fuel will simply be sold to the world market - it won't help us at all.

they would just mean even more profits for the energy companies, which is why the newspapers are telling you it's a  good idea.

[Chekhov]

1 hour ago, sibon said:

ETA: I notice that he hasn’t been back to answer my question.
 

That says it all- it is too difficult for him to answer.

1 - I have not seen your question, I do not have time to read everything on SF, I have  a job, a family and to go swimming (when they deign to allow it).

2 -You are a fine one to talk about not answering questions, remember Mike Buckley's pronouncement ?

 

1 hour ago, sibon said:

Who is in favour of nett zero, in your opinion?

There are people on here (and loads of other places, including all the main political parties) arguing for it, but, from your tone, I assume you are not one of them. Which I find a bit surprising, but oddly refreshing.

 

27 minutes ago, hauxwell said:

It’s been on the news this morning that we are bringing in gas from Australia in tankers. How will that affect the carbon footprint, bringing it all the way from there?

Where are they going to store it (since the government turned down the opportunity to subsidise the huge Rough gas storage facility) ?

And the price will be high anyway, I thought gas prices were set globally ?

Edited August 23, 2022 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

1 hour ago, retep said:

This is due to listening to the Greta's on here and around the world.

Fracking should have been started immediately and coal fired power stations and pits kept open until the UK  became self sufficient.

I can hear Scargill laughing from here.....

[Guest sibon]

6 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

 

 

There are people on here (and loads of other places, including all the main political parties) arguing for it, but, from your tone, I assume you are not one of them. Which I find a bit surprising, but oddly refreshing.

 

You didn’t answer my question.

 

Which members of SF have advocated nett zero? 
 

Go on, have a go. Just casting hit and run aspersions isn’t very nice. At least have the balls to back your claim up with something solid.

[melthebell]

46 minutes ago, ads36 said:

 

 

the waste takes up very little space, it is contained, and can be safely stored. Yes, this will likely mean burying it. After a few hundred years it's no more radioactive than the rock you're burying it under.

 

Not completely true, according to https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/radwaste.html

 

Plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years

 

when you are burying things that stay active for 24.000 years youre soon going to run out of space? then we run into the age old moral issue of sending dodgy materials to other countries to bury our waste, which we already do, and shouldnt be doing.

[Guest sibon]

1 minute ago, melthebell said:

Not completely true, according to https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/radwaste.html

 

 

 

 

when you are burying things that stay active for 24.000 years youre soon going to run out of space? then we run into the age old moral issue of sending dodgy materials to other countries to bury our waste, which we already do, and shouldnt be doing.

As a rough rule of thumb, you need five half lives to render something pretty harmless.

 

However, the waste from a nuclear power station is pretty small. It would be a good idea to build a few now, to give us time to sort out even cleaner alternatives.  Far better than fracking, for example.

[melthebell]

2 minutes ago, sibon said:

As a rough rule of thumb, you need five half lives to render something pretty harmless.

 

However, the waste from a nuclear power station is pretty small. It would be a good idea to build a few now, to give us time to sort out even cleaner alternatives.  Far better than fracking, for example.

Dont worry we are becoming self sufficiant in that regards, the chinese are going to build us some, and then probably be run by the big french energy company LOL