Where to get energy for the future

They had never built one of the type fitted in Dreadnought before, but they did
The Americans had, it's a US design that we tweaked and manufacture. And even then it is 5 years late. So far. It isn't finished yet, it's due 2026.
 
They had never built one of the type fitted in Dreadnought before, but they did

Perhaps you have worked on a large development project for a thing you have never built before?

The estimates will be wrong.

Things that you thought, will be wrong.

Things that you thought worked, won't

Things that you never knew about, will happen.

Somebody will try to change the requirement after you've built it

Government projects are the worst.
 
That is the MODs responsibility

And, as I said, nobody here has any experience of having done it.

Maybe the problem will go away if you ignore it for long enough.

Twenty thousand years, perhaps?
 
The only slower infrastructure to build would be the Severn Tidal barrage.
Really?

"Construction would take about eight years. The minimum lifespan of the barrage would be 120 years (about three times that of a nuclear reactor), but could easily be 200 years if decent maintenance was performed."

And would you care to tell us the cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant and how long it takes?

"The NDA’s most recent estimate is that it will cost current and future generations of UK taxpayers £132bn to decommission the civil nuclear sites, with the work not being completed for another 120 years."

That of course doesn't fully include the storage costs of radioactive waste that will be lethal for thousands of years!
 
Really?

"Construction would take about eight years. The minimum lifespan of the barrage would be 120 years (about three times that of a nuclear reactor), but could easily be 200 years if decent maintenance was performed."

And would you care to tell us the cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant and how long it takes?

"The NDA’s most recent estimate is that it will cost current and future generations of UK taxpayers £132bn to decommission the civil nuclear sites, with the work not being completed for another 120 years."

That of course doesn't fully include the storage costs of radioactive waste that will be lethal for thousands of years!
Planning and environmental reviews would make that comparable or longer than a nuclear plant I'd guess. Both are very slow.
 
Planning and environmental reviews would make that comparable or longer than a nuclear plant I'd guess. Both are very slow.



When do you think planning and environmental studies began for Severn and Morecambe?
 
When do you think planning and environmental studies began for Severn and Morecambe?
I know there have been studies, people have been considering it since the 1900s, but I didn't think they were sufficient to start building sea walls.

I think it's a great idea and should definitely be built, but it's not going to be quick.
 
I will accept nuclear power as an option . . . only when they can convince me that it is a safe option.
 
only when they can convince me that it is a safe option.

upload_2022-3-13_16-31-41.png
 
The general public is very biased against nuclear, on perceived and generally wrong idea of the dangers, without understanding how low the risks are, or of the risks of other fuels. Coal has always been one of the riskiest and with lots of damage to health of those living near them and the environments for many for miles downwind of them.
 

I am, as you all well know, incredibly stupid.

Why is it still considered to be incredibly stupid, to site the next very much needed nuclear reactor, somewhere inbetween Tower Bridge & the Houses of Parliament???

Tell me the answer, I cannot possibly work it out by myself . . . .
 
Back
Top