Comments on: Nuclear power? Mmmm. Maybe http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/ Question Everything Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:55:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU By: Leftwing Criminologist http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5701 Leftwing Criminologist Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:49:04 +0000 http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5701 I just want to agree withe the comments the other two commenters made, they're what i was going to say when i clicked the comment button. The main arguement being used to support building new nuclear power stations in North Wales (Anglesey in particular) is that the local economy is so dependent on the current nuclear power station. If that's not a damning indictment of what capitalism has to offer workers in this area i don't know what is One of the other arguements for nuclear power is that it's supposedly reliable, but wylfa keeps going down and in 2002-3ish was out for 18 months! I just want to agree withe the comments the other two commenters made, they’re what i was going to say when i clicked the comment button.

The main arguement being used to support building new nuclear power stations in North Wales (Anglesey in particular) is that the local economy is so dependent on the current nuclear power station. If that’s not a damning indictment of what capitalism has to offer workers in this area i don’t know what is

One of the other arguements for nuclear power is that it’s supposedly reliable, but wylfa keeps going down and in 2002-3ish was out for 18 months!

]]> By: Kate Ahrens http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5695 Kate Ahrens Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:10:23 +0000 http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5695 Kit said: "I don’t trust capitalism to run nuclear power – but, if the profit motive is removed, then why not? Why is there this – quite frankly irrational – knee-jerk reaction to nuclear power?" But that seems to me to be the crux of the issue. Its not that the nuclear industry has a record of things going wrong its that capitalism has a record of cutting corners, covering up mistakes and generally looking to get away with making the production of stuff as cheap as possible, and, as you also say, when things go wrong with nuclear power they can go very very wrong indeed. I wouldn't have any objection to a future socialist society investigating whether nuclear power is a feasible option, but that's a hell of a long way away from supporting the current very capitalist societies moves to building a new generation of nuclear reactors. As for the other argument - the safe disposal of nuclear waste isn't just "difficult" it is currently completely unknown whether we can do it or not. Spent fuel rods and other radioactive waste has a half life of many thousands of years, and we have no way of knowing whether any of our efforts to contain it will last long enough or what the consequences would be of any breaches. And again, do you want to trust the disposal of nuclear waste to Rentokil or Interserve or one of the other dodgy firms that will bid for the government contract to do it? What are the other options? Well for one lets look at micro generation through renewable resources - using solar panels, or small windmills on commercial and residential properties that can feed any excess electricity back into the nationl grid as well as providing power for individual use. Kit said: “I don’t trust capitalism to run nuclear power – but, if the profit motive is removed, then why not? Why is there this – quite frankly irrational – knee-jerk reaction to nuclear power?”

But that seems to me to be the crux of the issue. Its not that the nuclear industry has a record of things going wrong its that capitalism has a record of cutting corners, covering up mistakes and generally looking to get away with making the production of stuff as cheap as possible, and, as you also say, when things go wrong with nuclear power they can go very very wrong indeed.

I wouldn’t have any objection to a future socialist society investigating whether nuclear power is a feasible option, but that’s a hell of a long way away from supporting the current very capitalist societies moves to building a new generation of nuclear reactors.

As for the other argument - the safe disposal of nuclear waste isn’t just “difficult” it is currently completely unknown whether we can do it or not. Spent fuel rods and other radioactive waste has a half life of many thousands of years, and we have no way of knowing whether any of our efforts to contain it will last long enough or what the consequences would be of any breaches. And again, do you want to trust the disposal of nuclear waste to Rentokil or Interserve or one of the other dodgy firms that will bid for the government contract to do it?

What are the other options? Well for one lets look at micro generation through renewable resources - using solar panels, or small windmills on commercial and residential properties that can feed any excess electricity back into the nationl grid as well as providing power for individual use.

]]> By: a very public sociologist http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5691 a very public sociologist Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:56:37 +0000 http://kitnotes.org.uk/2008/01/07/nuclear-power-mmmm-maybe/#comment-5691 Hmmm, maybe not. I'm not ideologically opposed to nuclear power. I have every confidence a socialist society could do a better job of running them, though I would favour situating them on the moon, just in case. But there are carbon issues: the mining, refining, transportation, and storage of waste release far more carbon than carbon saved through nuclear generation. Furthermore, nuclear power is only a short to medium term "solution": as more countries go nuclear, the scramble is on for increasingly scarce uranium stocks. Only a bold programme of investment renewable energy generation and more funds sunk into carbon capture offer a way out of the mess, IMO. Hmmm, maybe not. I’m not ideologically opposed to nuclear power. I have every confidence a socialist society could do a better job of running them, though I would favour situating them on the moon, just in case.

But there are carbon issues: the mining, refining, transportation, and storage of waste release far more carbon than carbon saved through nuclear generation. Furthermore, nuclear power is only a short to medium term “solution”: as more countries go nuclear, the scramble is on for increasingly scarce uranium stocks. Only a bold programme of investment renewable energy generation and more funds sunk into carbon capture offer a way out of the mess, IMO.

]]>