No Nuclear Power Stations being built if Labour get in power
Nuclear Power stations
Must be built from now But now EDF will say we can not go ahead if Labour get in power 2015. Which simply means in our Future Power Cuts will stop so many in England. Angela Knight of Energy UK speaking on all TV news today. |
That's not good is it Arista?
|
I think she is jumping the gun a little, I watched her and was rather unimpressed to say the least.
|
Quote:
|
No nuclear power.. Well if we go ahead with fracking and it causes an earthquake we may be glad of that?
|
http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-329x437.jpg
"Q. How would energy firms react if Labour went ahead? A. With anger. They might ramp prices up before any freeze came into effect. Some might even threaten to quit Britain altogether. " sunonline+ |
Quote:
They have had their own way, ripping people off left right and centre for years now and show no understanding or compromise. They will also be fully aware that since this is only for the period June 2015 to early 2017 and that then they will still have to be working under a Labour Govt for many more years after this freeze is ended. I knew they would scream blue murder, greedy,incompetent sources generally do. It is really a sad and bad thing when this Govt has been reducing the incomes of so many people that this Govt haven't done more to help bring about a freeze in energy prices too anyway themselves. The energy spokesmen/women can scream all they like but they never listen to the screams of their customers so their ugly sort of threats should be discounted. They could learn a lot themselves from having to 'struggle' for a short time to balance things,they may even learn more as to how their customers feel most of the time then. |
Quote:
I struggle with the question of energy... On the one hand, prices are getting to be unsustainable for many people... 4 years ago my energy bill was around £70 a month, its now £110 a month without any significant change in usage. coal and gas power stations are not sustainable and the prices will just rise until it runs out altogether. On the other hand, we're not making enough progress with renewable energy sources for it to be a realistic prospect for our energy needs - and then you have nuclear. Official statistics say the risk of meltdown is "1 in 10,000 years" ... And yet there have been two world-altering meltdowns in the last 50 years. the effect of the fukushima meltdown is being massively covered up and underplayed - it's still spewing radioactive material into the pacific, theres another reactor core still posing a massive threat, and much more radiation hit the western coast of the US than has ever been reported by the mainstream media. Remember that it took 10 to 20 years for the full extent of Chernobyl to see the light of day. Work on Chernobyl is still endlessly ongoing, also, some 30 years later, to keep it fully contained. Basically I think nuclear energy is potentially very scary ****. Most people have this idea that "the scientists", "the engineers", "the people in power" actually know what they're doing and have a grip on it but there's plenty of evidence - some very recent - that we're little more than children playing with matches. |
Quote:
Excellent post and a very strong ending to it too. I agree with you,I also have to say you make and raise brilliant points. Really interesting reading all the time from you Toy Soldier. |
So what are we supposed to do to meet our rising energy demands in the next 20-40 years ? Without new nuclear power stations we are at the mercy of the open market wrt to importing Oil and Gas. We are currently a net importer of fuel and rely on buying from the open markets to cover our deficit. But with Gas and Oil costs rising we are paying ever more for these commodities.
We need to invest in our own energy production and Nuclear is really the only viable option bearing in mind the problems with Oil and Gas which have large greenhouse gas emissions which would put us in breach of our Carbon emissions quotas. The cost of investing in Power stations with Carbon Capture technology is cost prohibitive and so that only leaves renewable energy sources like wind,solar,tidal etc But these only account for some 8-14% of demand so cannot provide the massive amounts of power our country will require in the coming decades. So until Nuclear Fusion becomes a reality in 2050 and beyond (as it is far cleaner and far safer) we have no real choice other than to stick with Nuclear Fission power and this demands massive investment in the next generation of Power stations and reprocessing technologies. The last few Govt's have fudged the Energy issue but like the proverbial Elephant in the room it must be addressed and addressed NOW........!!!!! |
The bottom line for me is this: why is a French, state-owned company having a say in what this country does or doesn't do in the future?
|
Quote:
EDF may sell the UK part off due to Stalinist Labour |
Quote:
|
Too many nuclear stations could be really bad for the environment and sets up more potential for disasters. Stay safe and use renewables instead :hugesmile:
|
Quote:
You are wrong they are closing current stations down as they are real old. New Nuclear Stations must be Built fast or we will have massive power cuts New Labour should have started on them in their long 13 years but they did feck all. |
Yes Labour should have addressed this and many other issues in their spending spree. Now of course it will be the Tories fault, whilst trying to reduce Labour's monumental debt.We will face power cuts, nothing is being done to stop that happening. We are also subject to any increase the foreign suppliers of Oil and gas choose to inflict on us. Sitting ducks.
|
I want Nuclear :shrug:
|
Quote:
|
Erm, did I hear right on the news just now...companies are moaning that they wont be able to build new stations if the prices cant go up HOWEVER the prices have gone up for ever, but they havent built anything for ten years anyway? :laugh:
I may have misheard though. I kinda agree with Ed here. I think the energy companies are just issuing threats because they cant face not robbing people as much in the future. I get his comparison with the banks too. |
Quote:
Yes if we do not Build the New ones Its lights Out thanks to Fecking Stalinist Labour ( If they get into power May 2015) |
Quote:
Miliband is dead right and it is time someone took a stand against them and up to now he is the only one to concretely make a decision to. Every bit of pussyfooting around by this hopeless lot in Govt now as to the energy companies has resulted in them giving nothing more than lip service. Time to shake them up and wake them up, I am certainly with Milband on this and actually feel the majority of the UK will be too. I am not impressed with their doom and gloom statements and threats and frankly I think they should be condemned for making them. If an elected Govt wins an election to freeze energy prices, the energy firms should respect and toe the line and also fulfill all their commitments for the future too. It is only for 20 months for goodness sake,not years. The greedy energy companies have no respect for their hard pressed customers but should accept at least the will of the electorate and elected Government. |
Quote:
I agree with Labour too. Nuclear power isn't really the best option. We should be investing in renewable energy and create an industry out of it. It's a much better option in the long run. |
Shame our coal mines were flooded isn't it?...
Anyhoo, yes the energy companies think they have us over an (oil) barrel, 'British gas'... that's a laugh! they can't raise prices before as I suspect hikes may not be allowed to be linked to inflation, they may bung dave a tenner to change that? Renewable and or green is the way hopefully. |
Quote:
That is not enough for the whole of England Old Nuclear Plants have Closed or about to New ones must be built or Power will be cut at Peak Times http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-329x437.jpg http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-329x437.jpg |
Incredible, Mandelson gets slated all the time he was a Minister in Blair's and then Gordon Brown's Govt,having to resign twice.
He was seen as irrelevant and rarely saying anything that was in line with what should be done or what was happening. Now he makes a moan of sorts against the current party leader's policies, his word is worth front page news. His sort of policies/ideas contributed in part to Labour's loss of the last election. What I would like to see on so called newspapers front pages is what ordinary people think of this policy and in fact especially customers of these greedy energy companies. Let's have some real people and real sense on the front pages for a change. As for the rubbish Daily Mail, really can anyone take that garbage they report seriously anymore, it is fast becoming worse than The Sun. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.