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 > Public transport: cheap or expensive? > Comments

Public transport: cheap or expensive? : Comments

By Ross Elliott, published 10/1/2020

Almost 100% of us believe that more – and cheaper – public transport is a key to solving congestion. Which we hope will mean we can all get around more conveniently in our cars.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All
Hasbeen, I am in Sydney and we have a defined catchment area.
That North Queensland had a major flood did not fix the drought in
NSW & part of Qld. We can't run sprinklers over the whole western plains.
So we have to plan for the rain we get.
It seems to be simple to me.
You match the number of people to the amount of water available.
Adjusting for drought years.
Any problem with that, I don't see one. Even rude people with Thorium
Reactors can't change that much, because no one has one going yet.
Don't know why, but the Indians seem to have given up.
Posted by Bazz, Saturday, 11 January 2020 1:10:59 PM
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
Bazz:
Again your ignorance is demonstrated. The Indians gave up on thorium because they tried to use it as solid fuel in conventional highly pressurised reactors. We Don't know that they've given up on thorium per se, just their approach to use in solid fuel reactors.

When and because the only successful and field trialled method shown to work, was a thorium powered Oak Ridge reactor.

A number of nuclear enthusiasts have found all sorts of problems with thorium and complain because they found it didn't suit their preference for highly pressurised solid fuel reactors. All the problems with nuclear power in the years since nuclear power was first commissioned has been due to the pressure they were required to operate under! And an enormous 150 atmospheres minimum.

Whereas, MSR thorium is an unpressurised system that cannot meltdown given the material used to assist the reaction is already molten and deliberately so. and a completely different and vastly cheaper method than current very costly nuclear power,r be it their build costs, or fuel consumption or cost!

You need to stop with the deliberate parroted misinformation spread, least folk suspect you are a fool.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Sunday, 12 January 2020 9:22:07 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
Ross,
This is an excellent article that sets out a lot of the observations I have been making for many years.
The cold reality of our culture is that it has come about, and is completely facilitated by, the automobile. Many of the advocates of public transport are inner city workers who assume that they are typical workers, which of course is a nonsense.
Myself - I am one of said inner city workers, but I choose to bicycle to work - unless it's raining or some other reason that cycling is not convenient, when I resort to my excellent, highly subsidised, public transport system.
Many more people would have a feasible cycle commute to work - probably more than currently have feasible public transport - but laziness is a major factor in why they don't do it. However, I fully realise that cycling is not a feasible option for most people.
Posted by Lionel W, Saturday, 18 January 2020 6:52:11 PM
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. Page 4
  6. All

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