The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Have we included the extent of now documented continual lying and cover-up of nuclear accidents throughout the West? Have we neglected to ask for the actuarial figures on potential accidents from Swiss RE? Did this diary cover the connection to weapons-related uses of byproducts of the entire nuclear chain? Did this diarist examine the incredibly peaceful history of the technological West over the last two thousand years, as an example of how we will guarantee an abiding peace corresponding to the length of time we need to protect the waste? (Not to mention shifts in the earth's subsurface, which i apparently mentioned.) Have we even discussed Peak Uranium under the assumption that civilization returns to health only when every growing economy gets 40% of it's energy from centralized nukes? (Centralized Nukes?: Is Cheval Fou implying there's an unaddressed social issue here?)
Those are serious holes in the argument, and if i wasn't erkältet from the cold wet winds and serious alcohol depletion from that most wonderful of ET meetup weekends, i would begin to propose an erudite and literary response to this diary. In fact, i hope to, but not soon, because next week i will be on the road performing Due Diligence on the DeWind 8.2 with Voith hydrodynamic drive, the liquid coupling which on paper provides a windmill with the desired variable speed without the necessity of complex and expensive power electronics. On paper.
But DoDo sums the response rather nicely. 6 nukes equivilent could be built with enough windpower in the UK, without any of the attendent risk, and with a whole christmas present of various social wonders attached. And if that was part of a coherent conservation strategy encompassing both real conservation and the introduction of new conservation technologies, we would have doubled the energy addition at half the cost and no risk.
But then we all underestimate the security risk to attacks on the sophisticated fiberglass layup factories which windpower introduces into society. Me, i'm selling my Concorde sleep blinders on eBay. "Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
"Wow, he's like the guy who jumps out a forty story high window, and after falling twenty stories, says... ""Hey, so far so good."" "Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
and the serious weaponisation potential of those long blades -- why, with a trebuchet you might be able to launch them all of a few hundred yards and knock down a house or two! oughta be banned, potential Turrist threats all of 'em.
but this gets us into a territory where the debate is not supposed to stray, and that is the perverse appeal of nuclear power to some people (almost exclusively males in my experience) precisely because it is so exquisitely toxic and dangerous. there is something so very, very Manly about keeping such a terrifying genie in a bottle; like some guys just have to own a pitbull or a halfbred wolf, ya know, they couldn't be happy with a nice friendly golden retriever, because the thrill of dominating and "taming" it (not to mention being able to sic it on "enemies" or to render friends and family dependent for their safety on the Big Man's control of his dangerous dog) just wouldn't be the same... sure I could be wrong, but there is so much gendering of the nuke debate that it's hard to ignore the obvious.
"renewables are for wimps" -- not so much because they haven't the potential to supply a decent and adequate energy consumption level, but could it be because they are just not big, shiny, complex and dangerous enough? I mean, if any dangfool dirtfarmer can generate windpower out on the back forty, how much fun is that? (and how in the name of Friedman can we possibly trap him/her into a perpetual captive market and extort tribute, with this pesky low-risk decentralisable tech floating around and getting cheaper every year?) The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
like the blog too, except for the reverse video text aieeee :-) The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
by gmoke - Nov 28
by gmoke - Nov 12 7 comments
by Oui - Dec 2
by Oui - Dec 19 comments
by Oui - Dec 14 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 278 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments
by Oui - Nov 1224 comments
by gmoke - Nov 127 comments
by Oui - Nov 1114 comments
by Oui - Nov 10