McNeil's credentials in Ecological Economics and Engineering are disciplinary fields of academic research that address the interdependence and coevolution of human economies, eco-benign engineering design and natural ecosystems over time. Catch on SM?

“Unrefined uranium is roughly as toxic as lead.” What a revelation, SM. Lead's a stable isotope and a final progeny of U238 but are you suggesting that lead's benign? Are you aware that unrefined/refined U238 and its twelve *unstable* progeny - radium, radon, polonium, thorium etc wreak havoc for billions of years before decaying to lead? No I thought not!

And how many of those nuclear reactors are under construction in EU countries, SM? Careful how you brag now and am I the first to inform you that the French nuclear programme is based on an American technology - the ones you sneered at? The French gave up on their own dodgy designs and purchased American pressurized water reactors designed by Westinghouse and then ran them off an assembly line. France's ignominious nuclear history is testament to its failures.

"The operating license stipulates that the plants can't discharge at about 25C, and this poses a problem if the water into the plant is higher than 25C.

Wot? How has the "condition" changed SM? A few of France's inland reactors already have cooling towers so when it gets hot, the electricity company brings in massive supplies of cold water using a fleet of huge trucks. Nevertheless, the industry now gets special permission to further increase the temperature of the water it's pumping back into the rivers despite the threat to marine life.

So what ingenious solutions are you offering for countries where rivers around the world are losing water (according to the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Colorado) or the threat to existing coastal nuclear reactors from rising sea levels, flooding and erosion? Who's paying?

But hey SM – here’s another cost analysis on nuclear energy and I bet you’ve got a thing or two you can tell these "schmucks" – you being OLO’s fount of knowledge on the atom and all that – hey?:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power.html

Protagorass, (a.k.a. chicken little)

Combined with your posting of deliberately incorrect information, you also completely fail to either read or comprehend previous posts or even the material to which you supply links, or acknowledge the many times in which I expose your BS.

"Dr Ben McNeil has a Ph.D in Engineering" - liar

Ben McNeil has no experience in engineering, power systems or construction, and none of his qualifications or previous papers give him more background to the construction costs of nuclear power stations than any other bloke off the street.

You said "radioactivity levels caused by the leak are 6000 times higher than regulatory limits allow" - another porker, I cannot find any indication of this any where.

"Ground and surface water tests indicated that levels of radioactivity were 5% higher than the maximum rate allowed" From Several sources including:

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

As all the uranium was in solution, the remedy was to put a temporary ban on the use of the water for irrigation until the contaminant was flushed out.

This was rated a level 1 accident. Refer to the ratings and then tell me how this was a catastrophe, and how the sky is falling?

http://www.asn.fr/sites/default/files/files/INES-scale.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale

Next: "French nuclear programme is based on an American technology - the ones you sneered at" - No I didn't.

Are you autistic or just too stupid to read? I said they reduced their construction costs by standardizing on the design, a concept that evidently eludes you.

Uranium 238 decays so slowly and with alpha particles that it is completely safe to handle (the level of radio activity is difficult to measure). So the "havoc" it wreaks is also a "chicken little" response.

Finally (for this post) "Nevertheless, the industry now gets special permission to further increase the temperature of the water it's pumping back into the rivers despite the threat to marine life."

When the river water temperature rises well above 25C how is passing water into the river at above 25C threatening the marine life? The threat is significantly less than from the CO2 from non nuclear power generation.

Waaaah! Wikipedia!? The Wizz on Atoms, the Nuked up Don cuts and pastes from Wikipedia: ‘This article (Wikipedia) does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.'

And where is your evidence to support your claim that the river water was 25 celsius SM? And where is the evidence to show that nuclear discharge water is the same temperature as it was when it was sucked in SM? There is no such evidence!

Here Dumpkoph – let me assist you: "ElectricitÈ de France received temporary approval to raise the temperature of the cooling water returned to rivers at the company's Tricastin nuclear site.

"The company plans to ask for permission to raise water discharge temperatures at up to a third of its 58 reactors across France.

“In Germany, environmental rules were relaxed at nuclear plants in Bavaria and Baden-W¸rttemberg. Plants in Baden-W¸rttemberg can now pump water as warm as 30 degrees Celsius back into rivers, up from 28 degrees Celsius, Reuters reported. In Bavaria, plants can raise their discharge water temperature to 27 degrees Celsius up from 25 degrees Celsius. In Belgium, Doel NPP (4 reactors) got permission for discharges at 33 degrees Celsius.”

2007: A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled yesterday that EPA cannot allow power plants to kill a trillion fish per year through their cooling water intakes. Cooling water intakes gulp in billions of gallons of river, lake and coastal water to cool power plant machinery. Along with the water, these intakes devour countless fish and fish larvae, devastating fish populations across the country.

2008: Both the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coastal Region criticized the use of coastal and river water to cool nuclear power stations. State authorities concluded that the routine operation of nuclear power stations is killing billions of fish and destroying marine and aquatic habitats by sucking in tremendous amounts of water each day and spewing it out as hot water.

contd….

“Uranium 238 decays so slowly and with alpha particles that it is completely safe to handle (the level of radio activity is difficult to measure). So the "havoc" it wreaks is also a "chicken little" response.”

More bobbing and weaving on your part but I must say you're hilarious SM!

Less 1: Uranium ores emit radon gas, and its highly radioactive daughter products and uranium mining is significantly more dangerous than other (already dangerous) hard rock mining. Uranium waste rock and tailings storage sites have been identified as significant sources of radon gas released into the environment.

Lesson 2: If uranium is inhaled or ingested especially via dust, its radioactivity can trigger the development of lung cancer and bone cancer because of uranium's affinity for phosphates.

Uranium-238 Decay Chain Series

Uranium-238
Proactinium-234
Uranium-234
Thorium-230
Radium-226
Radon-222
Polonium-218
Lead-214
Bismuth-214
Polonium-214
Lead-210
Bismuth-210
Polonium-210
Lead-206 (stable)

Take ya pick Dumpkoph. What about a Polonium 210 cocktail dear? Remember the gruesome murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006?

Incidentally Ziggy Switkowski advised Tony Jones on Lateline that he didn’t know enough about the CO2 emission equation to comment upon its veracity but he believes we could build reactors for $2 – 3 billion – whoops! Sounds familiar - more of your pub talk!

Hey though perhaps he could act as a travelling salesman for the Canadian government who announced a plan last May to seek buyers for Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd's dud, nuclear reactor business, to bring in private-sector management for AECL's problem-plagued Chalk River facility.

After a two-year review of Ottawa's flagship nuclear company, Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt has now launched a sale process with the aim of finding a major international partner for AECL to help boost global sales of its Candu reactors but you know they’re flogging a dead horse.

Ottawa faces liabilities worth approximately $7-billion to clean up waste at the Chalk River site – what a mess – but what else could one expect from the planet's grim reapers?

PS: Your inability to address the other issues I've raised and your pitiful red herrings are noted!

Protagorass,

Thanks to your illuminating post I will now avoid eating or breathing uranium. (or lead, mercury, cadmium etc) Twit.

Radon is a decay product of uranium, which is common in the Earth's crust. Every square km of surface soil, to a depth of 1 m, contains approximately 3 grams of radium, which releases radon in small amounts to the atmosphere. Globally, it is estimated that 2,400 million curies of radon are released from soil annually.

So Einstein, how come all life on earth has not ceased? Or is this yet another "chicken little" response. Maybe with a 4 day half life it decays to nothing in a month so unless you live on a tailings dump you are fine.

Wikipedia often has concise articles but if you want:

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Uranium_solution_spill_at_Tricastin_0907081.html
http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/French_authorities_keep_water_ban_after_nuclear_leak_999.html

Some links to support your wild unsupported claims would be welcome, as your record of truthfulness is not good.

Please note that river water levels were below safe drinking water levels within 2 days, and the bore water never registered any contamination.

The whole cooling water issue is a complete furphy, as evidenced from your posts this applies to all power plants and not just the nuclear, and has been remedied in most cases by the EPA, and is has absolutely b all to do with nuclear safety, nor do most of your other "chicken little" expressions of horror.

You are really scraping the barrel with "The ongoing plundering of Niger by French nuclear giant Areva." Or possibly it should be called the plundering of the substantial taxes and dues paid by Areva to Niger gov by corrupt Niger officials.

The bottom line is that in spite of all the accidents nuclear power is by far the safest even more so than renewable. Given the present inability of renewable sources to mean electricity demand, the choice will be nuclear or GHG emitting technology for decades.

You can bumble and bluster all you want, but the fact that nearly all the world is proceding with expanding their nuclear capacity shows that it is by far the lesser of two evils.

"So Einstein, how come all life on earth has not ceased? Or is this yet another "chicken little" response. Maybe with a 4 day half life it decays to nothing in a month so unless you live on a tailings dump you are fine."

Well Dumpkoph it's actually 3.8 days, however, radon 222 is a progeny of radium 226 which has a half life of 1602 years. Unfortunately the scientific ramifications and relevance of radium to radon would be way over your head but you could always look up your Wikipedia since science journals are beyond your intellectual scope.

"Or possibly it should be called the plundering of the substantial taxes and dues paid by Areva to Niger gov by corrupt Niger officials."

Yeah well Dumpkoph - you know the old adage: "Birds of a feather flock together!"

"The bottom line is that in spite of all the accidents nuclear power is by far the safest even more so than renewable."

When a man cannot count or number twenty and having been frequently told of it, it is a fair presumption that he is devoid of understanding. In essence - a cretin, and I'm outa here!