The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The nuclear renaissance is stone cold dead > Comments

The nuclear renaissance is stone cold dead : Comments

By Jim Green, published 23/12/2013

Nuclear generation fell in no less than 17 countries, including all of the top five nuclear-generating countries. Nuclear power accounted for 17% of global electricity generation in 1993 and it has steadily declined to 10% now.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
@spindoc -

My 'no one killed by wind or sunshine' was a bit tongue in cheek. People have died in the wind and solar industries, just not been killed by the energy source.

During the last four decades 12 people have died in the wind industry.

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/whats-the-deadliest-power-source

"The UK alone has had 1446 wind turbine related accidents over the last five years to Sept 2013, with 144 deaths."

That's a misrepresentation. Renewable UK recorded 1,500 incidents over the past five years, many of which were very minor. Of those, about 18 per cent - or close to 300 incidents - led to an injury, again usually very minor."

Most of the 144 "wind industry" deaths had nothing to do with the wind industry. They simply occurred close by a wind farm. Again, 12 wind industry deaths in 40 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8948363/1500-accidents-and-incidents-on-UK-wind-farms.html

"Plus 440 deaths related to solar power."

You seem to be taking all UK industrial deaths due to falls and attributing them to solar. If that is not the case please provide documentation for you claim.

"OLO is no place for bulltishers like you!"
Posted by Bob Wallace, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 4:57:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@arjay -

Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

It concerns you that people believe we should pursue sustainable development?

Or did someone tell you that Agenda 21 (a non-binding, voluntary plan) meant that blue helmeted shock troops would seize control of the planet?

If so, you might want to move to a different news source. Someone is treating you like a mushroom.
Posted by Bob Wallace, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 5:03:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bob Wallace see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fetZKwaInW0 Senator Anne Bressington knows the truth. Agenda 21 is not voluntary and is being implemented by our Govts surrepticiously.
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 8:11:49 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Senator Anne Bressington is a nutcase from down under.

Agenda 21, Club of Rome, fluoride..., she's piling up the list of tinfoil hat credentials.

It's a shame that we let people of her poor intellectual and reasoning skills get involved in our governments. Perhaps some day we may evolve.....
Posted by Bob Wallace, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 8:19:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So anyone who disagrees with Bob Wallace is a nut case. What do you say about the scientific evidence here Bob. http://www.ae911truth.org/
How about the 1000's of professionals here http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 9:47:07 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We've got to give Bob Wallace credit--at least he admits Agenda 21 exists! Not too long ago on OLO, renewable energy spruikers --and New World Order acolytes (like Bob)-- used to claim that anyone who even suggested an Agenda 21 existed belonged to the tinfoil hat brigade.

Now their story is: "Yeah, Agenda 21 exists, but it's totally innocuous" <<Agenda 21 is a non-binding [and] voluntarily...>>
So Oz is still considering it --right? -- WRONG!

Because, this is how the (Australian) Dept of Environment sees it:" Australia's commitment to Agenda 21 is reflected in a strong national response to meet our obligations under this international agreement"
http://www.environment.gov.au/node/13068

The words "commitment" and "obligation" are a mite stronger than Bob is wanting us to believe.

Then Bob tries to sell it as about:<< sustainable development>>
After-all, who among you would not want sustainable development! but that ain't all it is about. This is how the UN describes it:
"Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound
reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world
has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both
governments and individuals and an unprecedented
redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift
will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences
of every human action be integrated into individual and
collective decision-making at every level."
[The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993)]

Consider these words again: "a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced"

I am sure if Bob Wallace was coaxing lobsters into the cooking pot, his pitch would be that he was warming up the water to make it more comfy for them.
Posted by SPQR, Wednesday, 25 December 2013 11:16:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy