UK Politics Thread X: Boris' Big Bonkers Brexit Bash

[Philjia]

More efficient furnaces and turbines can allow for the same electricity generation from less coal and with fewer particulate emissions due to more complete combustion, although increased demand tends to mitigate any benefits this brings about. (This is Jevon's paradox)

And that's why the solution is a lovely blend of solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear energy.

And geothermal, if you can get it.

[Dooom35796821595]

More efficient furnaces and turbines can allow for the same electricity generation from less coal and with fewer particulate emissions due to more complete combustion, although increased demand tends to mitigate any benefits this brings about. (This is Jevon's paradox)

And that's why the solution is a lovely blend of solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear energy.

It doesn’t help that a lot of the climate protesters are also dead set against nuclear power.

[The Wasatch]

And that's why the solution is a lovely blend of solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear energy.

It doesn’t help that a lot of the climate protesters are also dead set against nuclear power.

Nuclear is better than fossil fuels, but, as with hydroelectric, other forms of alternative energy are preferable.

[Shrillland]

And that's why the solution is a lovely blend of solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear energy.

It doesn’t help that a lot of the climate protesters are also dead set against nuclear power.

I do understand why though, Chernobyl and Fukushima weren't good advertisements for the stuff, even though one was a fluke of nature and the other was what happens when you decide to screw around where you're not supposed to.

[The Wasatch]

It doesn’t help that a lot of the climate protesters are also dead set against nuclear power.

I do understand why though, Chernobyl and Fukushima weren't good advertisements for the stuff, even though one was a fluke of nature and the other was what happens when you decide to screw around where you're not supposed to.

However, Three Mile Island sealed its fate in North America as an apparently dangerous source of power. It is a bit less environmentally friendly than some other forms of power, because, while it is of course low on emissions, it produces waste that may take thousands of years to dispose of. Cesium isn't exactly a useful byproduct.

[Heloin]

It doesn’t help that a lot of the climate protesters are also dead set against nuclear power.

Nuclear is better than fossil fuels, but, as with hydroelectric, other forms of alternative energy are preferable.

Nuclear is preferable to every form of energy. No where near as damaging as coal, oil, or gas. Not as destructive as a dam. And wind or solar need to use massive areas of land to achieve the same output levels.

[Shrillland]

I do understand why though, Chernobyl and Fukushima weren't good advertisements for the stuff, even though one was a fluke of nature and the other was what happens when you decide to screw around where you're not supposed to.

However, Three Mile Island sealed its fate in North America as an apparently dangerous source of power. It is a bit less environmentally friendly than some other forms of power, because, while it is of course low on emissions, it produces waste that may take thousands of years to dispose of. Cesium isn't exactly a useful byproduct.

True. I used to be firmly opposed to Yucca Mountain until I learned more about it. I'm still opposed to some of the practices involving the workers, my Dad got thyroid cancer because he was a transient worker and thus not entitled to KI tablets. But that has to take a back seat to the fact that a lot of countries simply can't meet their needs on renewables alone.

[The Wasatch]

Nuclear is better than fossil fuels, but, as with hydroelectric, other forms of alternative energy are preferable.

Nuclear is preferable to every form of energy. No where near as damaging as coal, oil, or gas. Not as destructive as a dam. And wind or solar need to use massive areas of land to achieve the same output levels.

However, the waste product of nuclear presents an issue. Disposal of cesium and extraction and refinement of uranium are both resource consuming processes. Even if nuclear material is used from nuclear weapons, it must be processed before being used in a reactor or nuclear power plant.

[The Wasatch]

However, Three Mile Island sealed its fate in North America as an apparently dangerous source of power. It is a bit less environmentally friendly than some other forms of power, because, while it is of course low on emissions, it produces waste that may take thousands of years to dispose of. Cesium isn't exactly a useful byproduct.

True. I used to be firmly opposed to Yucca Mountain until I learned more about it. I'm still opposed to some of the practices involving the workers, my Dad got thyroid cancer because he was a transient worker and thus not entitled to KI tablets. But that has to take a back seat to the fact that a lot of countries simply can't meet their needs on renewables alone.

Quite true. Nuclear power still requires fuel to be mined and refined, which is a long and dangerous process. They mine uranium in the south of my state, and there is a clear environmental cost to it. I believe that nuclear power is imperfect and that solar is the preferable option, but solar is not feasible everywhere and, to be honest, nuclear is much preferable to coal, oil, and even natural gas.

[Dooom35796821595]

True. I used to be firmly opposed to Yucca Mountain until I learned more about it. I'm still opposed to some of the practices involving the workers, my Dad got thyroid cancer because he was a transient worker and thus not entitled to KI tablets. But that has to take a back seat to the fact that a lot of countries simply can't meet their needs on renewables alone.

Quite true. Nuclear power still requires fuel to be mined and refined, which is a long and dangerous process. They mine uranium in the south of my state, and there is a clear environmental cost to it. I believe that nuclear power is imperfect and that solar is the preferable option, but solar is not feasible everywhere and, to be honest, nuclear is much preferable to coal, oil, and even natural gas.

And solar power needs toxic elements which need to be mined with similar issues to uranium. All solutions have their advantages, and their drawbacks. But most important of all is not to be over reliant on one, so a balance depending on local environment is the best solution.

And of course, if we replace petrol vehicles with electric ones, that’s going to increase the demand for electricity, so more plants have to be built.

*edit* oh, and someone posted this a while back, which I thought sounds interesting to potentially solving some of the uranium supply issues.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca ... 8184dd159a

[The Wasatch]

Quite true. Nuclear power still requires fuel to be mined and refined, which is a long and dangerous process. They mine uranium in the south of my state, and there is a clear environmental cost to it. I believe that nuclear power is imperfect and that solar is the preferable option, but solar is not feasible everywhere and, to be honest, nuclear is much preferable to coal, oil, and even natural gas.

And solar power needs toxic elements which need to be mined with similar issues to uranium. All solutions have their advantages, and their drawbacks. But most important of all is not to be over reliant on one, so a balance depending on local environment is the best solution.

And of course, if we replace petrol vehicles with electric ones, that’s going to increase the demand for electricity, so more plants have to be built.

I absolutely agree. I am in favor of initiatives that will ban or restrict the production of non-electric consumer vehicles after a certain year.

[Flawless Walruses]

Nuclear is preferable to every form of energy. No where near as damaging as coal, oil, or gas. Not as destructive as a dam. And wind or solar need to use massive areas of land to achieve the same output levels.

However, the waste product of nuclear presents an issue. Disposal of cesium and extraction and refinement of uranium are both resource consuming processes. Even if nuclear material is used from nuclear weapons, it must be processed before being used in a reactor or nuclear power plant.

There are reactor designs that don't require enrichment at all - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor

[The Wasatch]

However, the waste product of nuclear presents an issue. Disposal of cesium and extraction and refinement of uranium are both resource consuming processes. Even if nuclear material is used from nuclear weapons, it must be processed before being used in a reactor or nuclear power plant.

There are reactor designs that don't require enrichment at all - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor

Interesting! Thanks for telling me. I will research this. Molten salt reactors are an interesting innovation as well, though not without their flaws.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

And solar power needs toxic elements which need to be mined with similar issues to uranium. All solutions have their advantages, and their drawbacks. But most important of all is not to be over reliant on one, so a balance depending on local environment is the best solution.

And of course, if we replace petrol vehicles with electric ones, that’s going to increase the demand for electricity, so more plants have to be built.

I absolutely agree. I am in favor of initiatives that will ban or restrict the production of non-electric consumer vehicles after a certain year.

Let's not go about banning things. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing.

[The Wasatch]

I absolutely agree. I am in favor of initiatives that will ban or restrict the production of non-electric consumer vehicles after a certain year.

Let's not go about banning things. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing.

Freedom of choice is excellent, but only when it doesn't infringe other freedoms, such as life and good health. Sometimes you must make things illegal to prevent the alternative.

[The New California Republic]

Nuclear is preferable to every form of energy. No where near as damaging as coal, oil, or gas. Not as destructive as a dam. And wind or solar need to use massive areas of land to achieve the same output levels.

Given the recent collapse of the plans for Moorside nuclear power station, the current state of nuclear power in the UK is in decline, a trend that is likely to continue (the red bars showing the shrinking output since the mid 90s):

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Let's not go about banning things. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing.

Freedom of choice is excellent, but only when it doesn't infringe other freedoms, such as life and good health. Sometimes you must make things illegal to prevent the alternative.

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

[Dooom35796821595]

Freedom of choice is excellent, but only when it doesn't infringe other freedoms, such as life and good health. Sometimes you must make things illegal to prevent the alternative.

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

Yeah, you can’t control the air you breath.....so no.

[The Wasatch]

Freedom of choice is excellent, but only when it doesn't infringe other freedoms, such as life and good health. Sometimes you must make things illegal to prevent the alternative.

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

Deal. However, regulation and the law are the only way to guarantee that corporations and all individuals maintain this societal contract.

[Eastfield Lodge]

Freedom of choice is excellent, but only when it doesn't infringe other freedoms, such as life and good health. Sometimes you must make things illegal to prevent the alternative.

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

What if the way you look after your life directly impacts and impairs my life and health?

[Greater vakolicci haven]

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

What if the way you look after your life directly impacts and impairs my life and health?

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

What if the way you look after your life directly impacts and impairs my life and health?

Guess it sucks to be you.

[The Wasatch]

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

What if the way you look after your life directly impacts and impairs my life and health?

Quite true. We need law and regulation to ensure that the freedom you enjoy and the life you are entitled to does not impede others.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

How about this.

I'll look after my life and good health, you look after yours. Deal?

Yeah, you can’t control the air you breath.....so no.

The air is fine.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

What if the way you look after your life directly impacts and impairs my life and health?

Quite true. We need law and regulation to ensure that the freedom you enjoy and the life you are entitled to does not impede others.

There's no obligation on me to give a flying fuck about your life and good health. Don't try to protect mine, I won't try to protect yours.

[Dooom35796821595]

Yeah, you can’t control the air you breath.....so no.

The air is fine.

No, it’s not.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ll-exposed