Ten good reasons to resist (UK) nuclear proposals

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/content/camden/hamhigh/postbag/story.aspx?brand=NorthLondon24&category=Postbaghamhigh&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=postbaghamhigh&itemid=WeED17%20Jan%202008%2012%3A57%3A40%3A073

Ten good reasons to resist nuclear proposals

[e-mail]
17 January 2008

I and the Liberal Democrats will continue to oppose nuclear power. Do not be conned - nuclear power is not green, it will not reduce our carbon emissions significantly, it won't be ready in time to replace our current nuclear power stations, it will be expensive, it is inefficient, it is a diversion from the things we really need to do, it is a target for terrorists, it is not the only way to provide baseload supply, it will not safeguard our energy security and we still don't know how to deal with the waste.

Here are 10 reasons why I am against it:

1. Nuclear power is not green:

Mining uranium requires fossils fuels. So does building a nuclear power station. And so does trying to dispose of radioactive waste. Over its lifecycle a nuclear power station produces as much carbon dioxide as a gas-fired power station (Van Leeuwen & Smith 2005). Better than oil or coal but not carbon-free. And it will get worse. In the not too distant future uranium will become so hard to mine that it will require more fossil fuels to extract it than the energy that will be produced from it.

2. Nuclear power will do little to reduce our carbon emissions:

Even if Britain built 10 new reactors, nuclear power would only deliver a four per cent cut in carbon emissions some time after 2025. Even the government admits this. That's too late. We need the carbon reductions now. About eight per cent of our emissions come from electrical appliances left on standby. We'd do far better to ban standby buttons.

3. New nuclear power stations won't be ready in time:

The earliest a new nuclear power station could possibly be ready is 2017 but 2025 is much more likely. But extra capacity is needed in the next few years when a number of nuclear and coal-fired plants are set to close. New nuclear will come too late. We'd do much better to invest in wind, tidal, solar, hydro and biogas (from food waste, animal slurries, sewage and landfill).

...

[NNadir]

1. There are actually no GOOD reasons to oppose nuclear power.

In general, the vast circle jerk of opposition to nuclear power is incompetent to make judgements mostly because it is a fundementalist religion that couldn't care less about science or reality.

I note, with bitter contempt as the planet dies, that the number of fundie anti-nukes trying to shut the Drax coal station - which emits more dangerous fossil fuel waste than any of 50 nations - is ZERO.

Why is it zero?

Because the fundie anti-nuke cult couldn't care less about dangerous fossil fuel waste, because it is ignorant of basic mathematics, and because it holds science in contempt.

[bahrbearian]

2. Wow, you woke me up from my Ignorance, what you said makes

sense,,,NOT
:eyes: :rofl:

[madokie]

3. wow, you are some kind of serious aren't you

I'll try not to mention what kind it is though, ok :rofl: