• Russia wants to build UK power plants
    48 replies, posted
That's exactly what we need; build better more modern nuclear plants. Sure, they're kinda high-maintenance, but treat 'em right and the atomic dragons nestled in the piles won't burn down your villages. I'm assuming they're still using the old fuel rods system; hoping for LFTRs is a bit optimistic, especially since I think those are still "experimental".
[QUOTE=ironman17;38247275]That's exactly what we need; build better more modern nuclear plants. Sure, they're kinda high-maintenance, but treat 'em right and the atomic dragons nestled in the piles won't burn down your villages. I'm assuming they're still using the old fuel rods system; hoping for LFTRs is a bit optimistic, especially since I think those are still "experimental".[/QUOTE] As much as I like LFTRs, I doubt we'll see many major plants that's using it until we get nuclear fusion nailed down(2040 last time I checked for the DEMO plant), They still show promise for use in less wealthy countries(due to the insanely low price of thorium) or maybe even mobile plants if we can get the reactor small enough(Thorium powered planes would be kinda awesome)
[QUOTE=Canary;38246692]Fuck no, France are the best at making Nuclear power plants they have hundreds.[/QUOTE] Don't see what's wrong with Japan's, people just have issue because of the whole thing with the tsunami. And we don't tend to get many of those in the UK [editline]30th October 2012[/editline] And I think most country's plants hit with tsunamis would have similar problems
Nuclear power is the best power.
[QUOTE=Jimbojib;38247867]Don't see what's wrong with Japan's, people just have issue because of the whole thing with the tsunami. And we don't tend to get many of those in the UK [editline]30th October 2012[/editline] And I think most country's plants hit with tsunamis would have similar problems[/QUOTE] The people who thought anyone was at fault with the shit that happened in japan are the same people who thinks chernobyl is in russia, that nuclear fission plants can explode, and that a tokamak is an axe I repeat, no power plant of any type currently functioning or has ever functioned could have taken what happened to fukushima etc better than they did, can't think of one that would do just as good even.
[QUOTE=Crimor;38247965]The people who thought anyone was at fault with the shit that happened in japan are the same people who thinks chernobyl is in russia, that nuclear fission plants can explode, and that a tokamak is an axe I repeat, no power plant of any type currently functioning or has ever functioned could have taken what happened to fukushima etc better than they did, can't think of one that would do just as good even.[/QUOTE] Well actually, a floating nuclear power station would be unaffected.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38246066]Chernobyl was more a case of incompetence/recklessness on part of the employees themselves. Albeit something as potentially dangerous as a nuclear power plant should probably have a few more fail-safes to prevent that sort of thing. [/QUOTE] To be fair part of it [i]was[/i] the reactor itself. The RBMK reactor was inherently unstable at low power levels. It would act up even with competent staff manning the controls, and the emergency shutdown procedure would actually throttle it up a bit before it started to shut it down.
i always loved the stalker series
[QUOTE=Bobie;38248171]i always loved the stalker series[/QUOTE] But STALKER is in Ukraine.
[QUOTE=Crimor;38247965]The people who thought anyone was at fault with the shit that happened in japan are the same people who thinks chernobyl is in russia, that nuclear fission plants can explode, and that a tokamak is an axe I repeat, no power plant of any type currently functioning or has ever functioned could have taken what happened to fukushima etc better than they did, can't think of one that would do just as good even.[/QUOTE] Umm, the people owning the Fukushima reactor in Japan were totally at fault, mate. The company owning the Fukushima plant ignored a warning back in 2005 or so that they were totally underprepared and they refused to update and repair the plant properly. It was a plant designed pre-Chernobyl and it wasn't being looked after properly, they were cutting corners and skimping costs. If they'd have actually updated it to modern standards, amazing as it may sound, Fukushima would have likely survived the tsunami. I'd post my source, but I've lost it and am posting from memory, it's probably in one of the original Fukushima threads. --- I was about 14 years off, they were actually warned in 1990 that they weren't up to scratch, and again in 2004. [url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/japan-s-reactor-risk-foretold-20-years-ago-in-u-s-nuclear-agency-s-report.html[/url]
[QUOTE=PaChIrA;38248546]But STALKER is in Ukraine.[/QUOTE] you won't be saying that when you wake up with some shitty PDA that says 'kill cameron'
[QUOTE=dcalde78;38245862]If anyone were to build power plants in the UK, I'd want it to be the Japanese.[/QUOTE] good thing Hitachi are then
[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;38249055]good thing Hitachi are then[/QUOTE] I'm sorry.
-snip- Wrong thread
Would this be built and owned? I don't really want other countries owning our power, I'd rather it were state owned.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;38249347]Would this be built and owned? I don't really want other countries owning our power, I'd rather it were state owned.[/QUOTE] Welcome to capitalism, your basic resources are subsidiaries of foreign companies.
[QUOTE=laserguided;38249446]Welcome to capitalism, your basic resources are subsidiaries of foreign companies.[/QUOTE] I bet the Tories did this
[QUOTE=Rastadogg5;38245818][t]http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/chernobyl_25th_anniversary/bp2.jpg[/t] Woops![/QUOTE] Ukraine
[QUOTE=Virtanen;38251020]Ukraine[/QUOTE] Russian design. But still, just a joke. Didn't mean anything serious by it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.