Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wraithe
20 + year life...
|
I have read different quotes to 20 years, 10-15 I'm sure in local newspaper - 20 years might be the go in scandanavia or tassie - but not in tough hot conditions here.
My point is that ALL energy generating systems have a finite lifespan - not just nuke plants - as that seems to be that favourite anti-nuke angle - its economics. I understand renewable systems arent economical either, but the only one that ppl have a problem with being uneconomical and finite is NE? weird?
Do conventional power plants create heat as well (as well as millions of tonnes and tonnes of lung choking pollutants- prolly just as much as nukes?)
I lived in south west scotland not far Sellafield nuke station in northern england for a fair while - I didnt notice much heat coming from that one
I even visited it once - altho i did work with ppl the were volunteer observers on their w/e's keepin an eye on leaks into the solway firth with their geiger counters, and were very concerned citizens about it all, but that cant be compared to a new modern 21st century nuke plant.
oh well good old iceland are just laughing there heads off by now during this energy crisis with all their unlimited free geothermal power
One thing that bothers me about the anti-nuke/pro renewable ppl is all the emotional/hysterical attitude they project - makes me uneasy and think they arent being totally logical and calm about it - emotion and propoganda should have no part in the debate IMO.