The Forum > Article Comments > On television advertising > Comments
On television advertising : Comments
By Don Aitkin, published 2/10/2020Over the past few months I have become more and more aware of, interested even, in what passes for advertising on our commercial TV channels, and on the SBS as well.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
-
- All
Never ever seen one extolling the virtues of nuclear power and the claim that, it has per gigawatt, the lowest fatality rate of any energy provision, lower even than renewables?
Or the fact that unconventional nuclear power (MSR thorium) has the lowest costing, cleanest safest energy generation. And carbon-free to boot.
Seriously, had either Chernobyl or Fukushima been configured as M. S.R's, i.e., Molten salt reactors, burning far more abundant and far less costly thorium? None of the problems attributed to those two reactors would have occurred, let alone, have the hugely illinformed//misinformed anti-nuclear brigade rattling their cages/going bananas any time the (the sky will fall) topic is raised.
I wonder what they'd do if someone had the wit to advertise nuclear power along with the verifiable facts pertaining to it.
Or if either coal or gas had to conform to the same rougue emissions criteria as nuclear power, neither would be able to operate!
Would we still have a mining industry if it didn't include coal or gas?
You bet and even more so, given we'd need to mine uranium and or, thorium. Plus lithium and beryllium.
Then we'd need to mine and refine twice as much copper for electric vehicles, when we finally get around to electrifying the economy. Something we can't avoid given the phasing out of combustion engines by the world's vehicle manufacturers.
As for advertising on free to air? It'd be a shame to interrupt all those commercials, with a bit of programme.
Alan B.