View Single Post
Old 10th Feb 2013, 11:48
  #10 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 51
Posts: 794
Yeah right.
And because so you look at the costs of Sellafield the very thing you are ignoring does not exist, the production of these damned things produces tonnes of toxic byproducts which we all know are treated and disposed of properly in China? Or the transportation of these parts across the world is "carbon negative"? Or that the construction of these things actually has no environmental impact at all?

Or how about the small matter of the UK, to meet upcoming EU regulations, will need to have 30% of power generation provided by "renewables", mainly the very wind power that achieved a "low" of 2.43% of theoretical production just a couple of years ago? To get that level, that means you MUST have the backup from coal/oil/gas as well, you build 2 "plants" instead of one, and the total generation capacity has to rise from 76GWh to 120GWh. That, alone, is a cost of 50 Billion, just because of the use of inefficient power generation such as wind MUST be used to satisfy some insane regulation based on badly flawed "science".

So you have the commissioning and decommissioning of the turbines and the ignored environmental costs in the production and decommissioning process. You have the extra costs of the extra "standby" generation capability, it's construction, decommissioning, operation, both financial and environmental. You have the small matter of the turbines never, nationwide, ONCE hitting their "peak" of 30% of rated capacity (yes, that is the "best" average efficiency quoted by the operators that is to be expected. "30% efficiency is "a good thing". Go figure) over a year at any time, and the average per farm can be much, much lower than that, leading to the subsidies necessary to stop them failing as a business. You have all the new roads needed to reach these wind farms, along with all the traffic, etc, needed to maintain them (plus the parts from China, remember). All of that is ignored in the Great Global Warming Scamdal (not a typo), these wind turbines are "a good thing" because they generate energy for "free". Well, they ain't "free", not by a long shot. And the more there are, the higher the cost. We are looking at something that is costing more than your Sellafield "argument", financially and especially environmentally, yet are being seen as "good" by those who do not wish to look at what is actually involved in having them things everywhere. And the costs will keep rising, at the same rate, which is an incredibly steeper rate than Sellafield.

Yet you are comparing the upcoming mess as something that CAN be solved, like the mess that is Sellafield? Tell you this much, if as much money had been spent on research into nuclear waste disposal instead of being pissed away on whining about it, nuclear waste would not be a problem. And now that sort of money, and more, is being pissed away on the few who do make "money for nothing" as the whole scam is based on a fantasy based on the demands of a watermelon minority, and for what? More costs, more environmental damage, more toxic waste than you'll ever see at Sellafield (cunningly hidden behind a Great Wall of Silence), all in the name of faux-green "technology" and a twisted ideal that somehow making sure electricity prices are at "luxury" levels "coz it's eco, innit" is somehow actually "progress".


Last edited by hellsbrink; 10th Feb 2013 at 11:53.
hellsbrink is offline