The Forum > Article Comments > Nuclear power is viable > Comments
Nuclear power is viable : Comments
By Ian Hore-Lacy, published 28/1/2005Ian Hore-Lacy argues that nuclear power is cheap, clean, timely and viable as a source of power.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
Posted by Troppo, Wednesday, 2 February 2005 2:13:55 PM
| |
This link, describing the latest developments in Nuclear technology, may be of interest.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/china.html?pg=1&topic=china&topic_set= Posted by daveO, Friday, 11 February 2005 9:59:36 PM
|
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
I am here in this excellent country partly as a result of the Chernobyl disaster. Among other effects, this spread a cloud of radio-active Cesium across Europe, including central-north Wales, where I was resident at the time. Levels were reported at the time as "10 times" background, a figure doubted by the few people at the time with the capacity to monitor such things. Several years later it was admitted that the level was more like 100 times background. This explains why there was a ban on moving yearling lambs off the Welsh hillsides - the poor little blighters were glowing in the dark. This alone produced major economic damage. We decided to leave, and we succeeded. And this was thousands of kilometres from the source ...
OK - I'm biased. But what about the problem of waste? The same people who were trying to bury the stuff in the Welsh hillsides back in the early '80s, against strong, and successful opposition, are now members of a consortium trying to do the same thing here in Australia. Presumably it is the same waste, only more of it, but the same solution is being sought - bury it under the ground. No progress on this apparently.