PDA

View Full Version : nuclear power stations



Davidflude
27-09-2007, 06:54 PM
US sources have released details that show that John Howard is planning nuclear
power stations in Australia after the election. Somehow Kevin has found out and
is telling people.

This issue was raised on crikey today and in an email I got from Kevin.

I bet the planned power plants are neither pebble bed reactors nor Candhu heavy water natural uranium plants ,but light water reactors that use enriched uranium. Candhu reactors are the way to go if we want to make atom bombs. We could build a heavy water plant in Tasamania. the Iranians can show us how.

Axiom
27-09-2007, 08:00 PM
US sources have released details that show that John Howard is planning nuclear
power stations in Australia after the election. Somehow Kevin has found out and
is telling people.

This issue was raised on crikey today and in an email I got from Kevin.

I bet the planned power plants are neither pebble bed reactors nor Candhu heavy water natural uranium plants ,but light water reactors that use enriched uranium. Candhu reactors are the way to go if we want to make atom bombs. We could build a heavy water plant in Tasamania. the Iranians can show us how.
its all wonderful, except what is the plan to dispose of the long standing toxic waste?

Rincewind
27-09-2007, 08:07 PM
its all wonderful, except what is the plan to depose of the long standing toxic waste?

We could always dump it in Tasmania. After al,l that is what Queensland did with their long standing toxic waste (JBP).

Davidflude
27-09-2007, 11:40 PM
Pebble bed reactors have the monster advantage that the waste they produce is radioactive for hundreds of years rather than hundreds of thousands of years
as is waste from light water or heavy water reactors. The used pebbles can be put in nickel boxes and buried below the water table. It is not perfect but a very big improvement over other sorts of reactors.

Southpaw Jim
27-09-2007, 11:44 PM
It's spelled NOO kew lar. Just ask George W.. :P

Capablanca-Fan
27-09-2007, 11:50 PM
It's spelled NOO kew lar. Just ask George W.. :P
Ask quite a few Americans actually, as I've found. They are notorious for yod-dropping then they reinsert the yod in places where it is not there, such as "Hewston", TX.

Capablanca-Fan
27-09-2007, 11:52 PM
Europe and America have done very well with nuclear power. Yet Australia has one of the best sources of uranium. What a lost opportunity the scientifically illiterate green chicken littles have cost us! And nuclear power produces less greenhouse gas emission as well!

Basil
27-09-2007, 11:52 PM
I want to ask Julia Gillard. I think she'd be fascinating. Perhaps I'll ask her around to dinner. Boy, the things she could teach me.

Alas she'll be busy running a federal portfolio

:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:

Capablanca-Fan
27-09-2007, 11:54 PM
I want to ask Julia Gillard. I think she'd be fascinating. Perhaps I'll ask her around to dinner. Boy, the things she could teach me.

Alas she'll be busy running a federal portfolio

:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:
It will be first thing that the Labor lot have actually run! How many of the Left have actually run a business for example? Yet Australians look like trusting them to run a country? :wall: :wall: :wall:

Basil
28-09-2007, 12:00 AM
How many of the Left have actually run a business for example?
The answer to that is exactly the same as the care factor of those who will vote for her (them) :uhoh: :wall: :doh:

Axiom
28-09-2007, 12:01 AM
Pebble bed reactors have the monster advantage that the waste they produce is radioactive for hundreds of years rather than hundreds of thousands of years
as is waste from light water or heavy water reactors. The used pebbles can be put in nickel boxes and buried below the water table. It is not perfect but a very big improvement over other sorts of reactors.
how "not perfect" is it?

Aaron Guthrie
28-09-2007, 09:58 AM
:uhoh: :wall: :doh::hmm: :rolleyes: :hand: :cool:

Davidflude
28-09-2007, 10:25 AM
It will be first thing that the Labor lot have actually run! How many of the Left have actually run a business for example? Yet Australians look like trusting them to run a country? :wall: :wall: :wall:

Kev's wife for starters.

I bet Hyacinthe never ran a business.

Capablanca-Fan
28-09-2007, 11:24 AM
Kev's wife for starters.

I bet Hyacinthe never ran a business.
That's ironic, because she has come under considerable fire for treating her workers just the way Labor criticizes the big bad Howard IR laws for allowing. Typical of Labor and leftists in general not to practise what they preach (cf. Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy by Peter Schweitzer (http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/schweizer200510250827.asp)).

Basil
28-09-2007, 12:00 PM
Kev's wife for starters.
LAME DAVO

Starting the list with a relo is hardly auspicious :rolleyes:

Please acknowledge the Labor team is, was and forever will be bereft any body, idea and real world experience of running business - large or small. It IS the Labor way and no force on earth will change that.

Do a quick check on this BB. You'll encounter the same stats.

Everybody else carry on.

pax
28-09-2007, 01:13 PM
It will be first thing that the Labor lot have actually run! How many of the Left have actually run a business for example? Yet Australians look like trusting them to run a country?

Oh, that's unduly harsh. From what I hear, they all have experience running Unions..

Capablanca-Fan
28-09-2007, 03:27 PM
Please acknowledge the Labor team is, was and forever will be bereft any body, idea and real world experience of running business — large or small. It IS the Labor way and no force on earth will change that.

Do a quick check on this BB. You'll encounter the same stats.

Everybody else carry on.

It was the same with Africa after the new countries reached independence. Many of the new leaders had picked up socialism from the west, and added ethnic demagogery to the mix. They had few practical skills. And you can't blame western imperialism for their messes, because most went downhill after the Western empire builders left.

The only exception was Ivory Coast. Its first post-independence leader Félix Houphouët-Boigny did have experience as a business leader. And he ran the country with some market freedom free market lines. He also left the country open to foreign investment and allowed foreigners to remain in good jobs, resisting ethnic demagogery. He made a famous bet with Kwame Nkrumah, the leader of neighbouring Ghana, who intended a planned economy for the Africans, about whose policies would be better. Thomas Sowell, himself African-American, summarizes (http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/sect/2003/article/2046):


Much the same story could be told in Africa, where Ghana relied on socialistic programs and the Ivory Coast relied more on the marketplace, after both countries became independent back in the 1960s. Ghana started off with all the advantages. Its per capita income was double that of the Ivory Coast. But, after a couple of decades under different economic systems, the bottom 20% of people in the Ivory Coast had higher incomes than 60% of the people in Ghana.
Then he laments about the fecklessness of Western lefty pseudo-intellectuals (http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/sect/1006/article/1090):


Think of all the years when Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah, was being lionized by Western intellectuals while this kind of degradation continued to flourish under his rule. Nkrumah’s rhetoric and his symbolism were what mattered--especially his promotion of socialism and pan-Africanism, as well as his denunciations of the West. There was much less interest in what actually happened to the African people who lived under his rule--or under the rule of other despots, unless those despots were white, as in South Africa. The African leaders whose names became household words among Western intellectuals in academia and the media were those who talked the talk. Nobody cared whether they walked the walk.

Felix Houphouet-Boigny, first president of the Ivory Coast, was nowhere near as well-known, or as favorably regarded in the West, as despots like Nkrumah in Ghana or Julius Nyerere in Tanzania, even though the Ivory Coast achieved one of the highest economic growth rates in Africa--or in the world. The economic and political achievements of this country and its president were all the more remarkable because the Ivory Coast had fewer natural resources than Ghana or other African nations and was much poorer when it and these other nations became independent back in the 1960s. But, while Houphouet-Boigny’s market-based policies gave his people a rising standard of living, he did not give the intelligentsia the ideological raw meat they craved.

Clearly, the actual well-being of Africans was not what mattered most to the Western intelligentsia or to "black leaders" in the United States. For them, rhetoric has been more important than reality.

Axiom
28-09-2007, 03:50 PM
West ‘complicit’ in Third World corruption
By Hugh Williamson in Berlin

Published: September 26 2007 10:07 | Last updated: September 26 2007 10:07

Western multinationals and financial centres are often “complicit in driving corruption in poor nations”, Transparency International, the anti-corruption watchdog, charged on Wednesday as it published its annual ranking of how corrupt different countries are perceived to be.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e42dcef4-6c0d-11dc-a0cf-0000779fd2ac.html