Nuclear power

My body really dosen't cope well with heat, fybromyalgia means I can't control my bodies temperature. I sweat so much I can't drink enough and end up with a weird mixture of bloated stomach from drinking so much and dry burning skin. I frequently can't eat when it's to hot, I once went for five days without eating anything, even fruit, I sometimes have to force myself to swallow, my joints swell up, esepcially my knees and ankles, I feel sick and dizzy all the time and my blood pressure drops. Doctors have run all sort of tests and everything comes back normal, I've tried various alternative therapies, but none of them have helped, the only thing that  has is sniffing rosemary essential oil to raise my blood pressure a bit. I'd be interested to know how to think this lot away.

TheCatWoman said:

I must admit to not knowing how you can cope with the heat

I spent last week demolishing brick walls, cutting channels through concrete floors for pipework, moving tons or rubble to the skip and taking in tons of new materials that often had to be carried up 6 floors worth of stairs because they were too long to fit in the lift.

I was spending 8 hours a day sweating profusely so had to keep hydrated carefully but it did run me down to the point an opportunist somach bug has floored me this week (hence the higher interaction level on here).

I guess this level of physical stress when I am nearly 60 isn't without it's risks.

I found that the impact of the heat was something I really used to struggle with until I worked out that it is one of those things that was largely mental. I used the concious mind to over-ride the signals from my subconcious that it was too much - rationalised whether it was a need to rehydrate or just the "its uncomfortable" signals and with practice could recondition myself to work in conditions that I would otherwise have been unable to do.

I don't remember when I picked up this technique but it has been very useful for shutting down a lot of the autism related sensitivities I have when I need to.

TheCatWoman said:

there should be more consultation about things that are going to change our lives as profoundly as AI, people should be made more aware of the consequenses.

The downside here is that most of the government don't properly understand AI anyway and the general public seem largely informed by scaremongering news stories so I doubt we could have a realistic conversation in a debate anyway.

The politics of power stations are often much more involved than we know, with foreign companies lobbying (read bribing) the government to get the contracts to build / run them, MPs wanting the jobs in their areas for them and no end of influence peddlers having their say.

It wouldn't be in the energy minsters interests for the public to see that they will have a seat on the board of the electricity company once their term is over (wit the accompanying 6 figure salary) as their incentive.

I don't expect the government to to poll us on every descision, but there should be more consultation about things that are going to change our lives as profoundly as AI, people should be made more aware of the consequenses.

You're probably right I don't trust what the government says, any government, yours or mine and I don't trust nuclear energy.

I think we're going to have to agree to differ over this, as on so many other things.

I must admit to not knowing how you can cope with the heat, even with aircon, the low thirties would have me housebound and possibly hospitalised, but then I was the person sent home in a taxi because being out in 23.C heat and sunshine was to much.

I don’t think we would be wise to reject nuclear power because if we want the country to be competitive in the world market, have food and fuel security, power AI and continue to work on reducing the causes of climate change, nuclear power is the option to make. Scientists and oceanographers have attempted to make tidal farms viable, but the technology isn’t there yet and the cost would be prohibitive. Tidal power causes ecological harm through injury to marine animals, while marine barrages prevent the migration of species. We could say no to nuclear, but then we would be even more reliant on unscrupulous and immoral world leaders politicians for our needs. Nuclear power is the most reasonable option for us and for the health of our planet. 

I used to live about 10 mikes from a nuclear plant. If you were on a road late at night you could see totally black lorries which apparently were removing waste. I don't know where it went but I have heard it was abroad. Wherever it goes I wonder how much capacity there is worldwide for disposal and is there risk of it being disturbed for example by earthquakes.

TheCatWoman said:

I'm sorry that I don't feel able to take your word for it,

Here is the governments line on it:

https://ukinventory.nda.gov.uk/information-hub/about-radioactive-waste/how-do-we-manage-radioactive-waste/

If you don't trust the people in charge then that is your choice. I get the impression you wouldn't trust anyone (just based on what you have posted) and I'm not trying to change your mind.

I've worked with these people and organisations and I have a degreee of trust, but that is just me.

TheCatWoman said:

they take vast amounts of energy to run, nobodies asked us if we want that either, it's just being foisted on us whether we want it or not.

Do you think we should be taking polls from everyone in the UK for any policy decision? That isn't how governments work. They take the decisions and we have to live with them.

It is kind of our lot to have no say in these things.

TheCatWoman said:

What are tings like where you do live?

Where I live in Sao Paulo is a city of 13 million in the core areas and a total of 23 milion in the overall  suburban area (it has swallowed up a number of neighbouring cities).

It mostly uses renewable sources (83%) of which hydroelectric is the biggest source with oil and gas plants making up the balance.

It is hot here (low 30s this week) so there is a lot of air conditioning being used but little heating.

In some ways it is more progressive in its outlook than the UK but corruption would make me nervous in relation to nuclear power.

Well I'm glad you know where it all is, because I've heard totally different! I'm sorry that I don't feel able to take your word for it, but I'm deeply dubious about givernments and agencies remembering where they've left it. I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything just the usual *** ups that so plague this country and the world on general.

Electric cars are going to use lots of enegy, but what about all the data centres and running AI, they take vast amounts of energy to run, nobodies asked us if we want that either, it's just being foisted on us whether we want it or not.

Another thing Iain, am I right in thinking that you don't live in the UK anymore? What are tings like where you do live?

TheCatWoman said:

do we actually know where the waste thats been created in the last 60-70 years is?

Yes.

It is one of the most highly regulated materials on the planet and can be traced fairly easily by the authorities.

They obviously won't give that info out to avoid it being nicked by terrorists creating dirty bombs - that is why they are secractive. The likes of you and I have no need to know where it is, but I know the protocols used and they are stricly enforced.

There was a company here in Wales that wanted to do tidal power in Swansea Bay, they did loads of research and environmental impact studies, even offered to remove it at thier own cost if it didn't work or harmed wildlife, it wasn't allowed to go ahead. From what I remember it didn't involve floating pontoons, but impeller type of thingies under the water, also if we can have offshore wind turbines and floating oil platforms, then why are the seas to heavy for tidal power? If we don't have real world trials then it will never get done and nothing will change.

I'll be glad when the do get hydrogen, then maybe I'll get rid of my car with it's infernal combustion engine, I just hope that the vehiches will be less complicated than the electric cars I've seen, because going by them, I think I could probably crash one before ever getting off the drive!

No we often don't get much say in things like power stations, but we did get some and to be honest one of the least of my worries is being prosecuted, if I get a criminal record then so be it.

I agree Herge, our country is broken and it's no better in North Wales that is is anywhere else in the north, to get to  the Welsh capital by train, I pretty much have to go via another country, England. I think stating HS2 in London was madness and it should have been started in Manchester at least with the next bits being to Leeds and places north.

But I still don't think that nuclear is right, do we actually know where the waste thats been created in the last 60-70 years is? One of the problems is that governments and energy authorities can be so secretive about this sort of thing that they don't see to tell themselves where things are, how an earth is waste going to be kept track of for the next tens of thousands of years, if we can't keep track of it over the last 60 years?

TheCatWoman said:

One of the power sources that's rarely talked about is tidal,

That is largely because our seas are frequently stormy and this is a fast way to damage the equipment that floats in the sea.

We sometimes have heavy seas that last for days at a time, lashing the floating pontoons with waves every few seconds day after day. We don't have the technology that can remain flexible enough to move with the waves and still take the beating from storms.

Also consider how much more frequent storms have become in recent years - possibly down to climate change and the move of the gulf stream.

I hope a technical solution is found but I think mother nature is just too brutal for our shores.

Geothermal is one area that is much more predictable and reliable but it isn't available in all regions due to the UKs relatively stable geology.

Large scale batteries (using sand is looking promising) may be a way forward using a simple heat exchange process - I've seen good results from this in the Nordic countries.

Also looking good for small scale use is the hydrogen engine - much like the petrol/diesel engine but the output is water rather than CO2

TheCatWoman said:

Another thing, is what all this extra power is going to be used for, data centres and AI, do we really want this?

It is needed to get rid of all the petrol cars mostly - the tens of millions of electric cars needed to do this will need a truly massive, on demand electricity supply at times when solar is no good.

TheCatWoman said:

Most of all I don't like the idea of having them imposed on us with little local say on it.

Have we ever really had a say? If we protest then we risk being criminalised under current laws.

One of the power sources that's rarely talked about is tidal, unless someone steals the moon, then tidal power will be a regular twice a day thing. I think a lot of solar panels are more efficient than they used to be, as others have said you don't need lots of strong sunshine for them to work.

I remember when wylva was being shut down and cleared out, the railway car's of mini nuclear storage bunkers sitting in sidings a few yards from my house sometimes for hours, before being shunted about and taken to their final destination. Its takes a huge amount of resourses from the police to guard this waste, the containers are almost certainly as secure as possible. It's not the idea of terrorists stealing aster material for a dirty bomb that concernes me, but the container being breached and the whole island and much of Wales, the North and Midlands of England being contaminated for decades, most people don't know that it was only a few years ago that the last farms were cleared to move livestock from the land contaiminated by Chernobyl.

Another thing, is what all this extra power is going to be used for, data centres and AI, do we really want this?

I agree that we do need sustainable power, but we could do so much more fairly easily, we could legislate for bulders to have to insulate homes to passive house standards, we could legislate so that new estates have have houses built so that one side of the roof faces south and has solar panels, the north side a green roof.

We need to be smart with our money nationally and make it work hard for us, to think laterally about it's use. I don't like the idea of every town having it's own mini nuclear ower station and I certainly don't like the idea of big business having them to power data centres.

Most of all I don't like the idea of having them imposed on us with little local say on it.

Climate catastrophe is definitely on the cards. In the grand scheme of things unless something dramatic is done on an international scale nothing is going to improve. The current dialogue coming out of the USA doesn't fill me with hope. Financial growth seems to be the only thing that's important, we might not have a habitable planet but the shareholders will be happy.

I can see that the world is not perfect. Decisions have to be made, however. As I see it climate change is a bigger and more pressing problem than nuclear waste disposal. The existence of nuclear waste is not going to result in London being mostly under water and the Netherlands disappearing under the waves, but climate change very well might. Renewable, weather-dependent, sources of power can only do so much, because they are not available all of the time. I would not be greatly concerned with a well-designed mini nuclear power station being sited near where I live. 

I agree with what you say about solar panels. I have them as well as batteries to store power and a system which tops up the water tank when the batteries are full. Since having them we have saved a lot of money as well as resources. I have been amazed how much is generated in the winter and during the summer most of our hot water comes from the top up in the emersion heater rather than the gas boiler.

We need some form of sustainable reliable energy. Renewables do have limitations currently but the right mix could cover many of the gaps. Nuclear power generation in itself is safe but the waste is problematic as it has to be stored some how for generations. Unless some other form of generation comes into play we're stuck with it. The development of nuclear fusion still seems a long way off even though there have been further breakthroughs announced recently. 

The NIMBY argument is valid to a degree, would you want a nuclear plant nearby, no matter how safe they are.

Encouraging micro generation would be great, whether it's solar, wind or whatever. New builds should always have solar, rain water harvesting and be as energy efficient and insulated as possible. It should be far cheaper to retrofit existing housing stock with solar etc.

Businesses are in business to make profit, but there needs to be a limit on margins that can be charged on something like micro power generation supply and installation. The government offer grants on the likes of heat pumps but it's still really expensive especially if you have to swap out pipework and radiators.

Investing in infrastructure is the way forward whether it's building power stations, reservoirs, road or rail links. The government don't want to borrow and be seen as another labour government that spends what it doesn't have, who is going to pay, private enterprise doesn't do things from the kindness of it's heart.

I'm from "Up North" and everything the government announced doesn't get much further than Manchester. The A1 not being upgraded (again) HS3 northern end cancellation etc. The country is structurally broken, roads, hospitals, schools, social care, bus services, rail network etc, we need a serious rethink on our priorities as a nation.

Something has to give some where.

I agree. We never hear what they intend to do with the nuclear waste. To me that is not environmentally friendly.

What happens on a dull day, with no wind, during a drought? There needs to be a weather-independent way of generating electricity that does not produce carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases. Power from nuclear fission does this, nuclear fusion would be better, but is proving very difficult to achieve. 

TheCatWoman said:

nuclear waste is by definition dirty

Very much so:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/dec/05/sellafield-nuclear-site-leak-could-pose-risk-to-public

TheCatWoman said:

I still don't want them,

Nuclear power is a well established, relatively safe form of power generation and is much more reliable than any of the green sources of power.

How clean is green power anyway? There are huge problems with the lifespan and disposal of wind turbines and solar panels still for example I have connections in e-waste recycling and it has been impossible to find places that can recycle these effectively leading them to be dumped in rubbish tips and contributing to ground contamination.

The carbon cost of manufacturing these also needs to be taken into consideration

The disposal of radioactive waste has quite a few effective solutions now such as encasing in glass to hold it contain it and dropping it into deep drill wells in geologically stable areas such as the North Sea, encasing it in hundreds of meters of concrete.

The voulmes of waste are quite small so this is a viable solution.

If we find ourselves in a time when the rock thousands of meters below the North Sea is now on our doorstep then I expect the nuclear waste to the the least of our worries.

I did a lot of research into nuclear power when I studied physics in the late 1980s and it was robust back then, Between then and now it has been only in exceptional circustances that there have been any issues (Fukishima for example) and I suspect many more have died or suffered from the dangers and pollution from gas / oil / coal powered stations.

Green energy is getting better but it is very inefficient and often not available when needed (think of a cloudy, still midwinters day. No wind, wave or solar energy to use so without some other supply we would freeze).

Practicality is what is driving this - nuclear is not perfect but it is the best alternative available now. Once we have stable green energy available (geothermal perhaps) then we can look at alternatives.

With the push to lower carbon emmissions and to go all electric with vehicles we need to generate a lot more power than we currently can. Green can't cut the demand so without nuclear as your backup then the grid starts to become unreliable and blackouts occurr.

I would have no issues living near a nuclear power plant but then I know the protocols and physics of what goes on inside them.