Bruce wrote:
Bruce wrote:
70 years since splitting the atom, and 50 years since the opening of the
world's first nuclear power station* nothing has changed.


I forgot the footnote.

*In 1956, Her Majesty The Queen opened Calder Hall Nuclear Power Station
at Windscale, in part of the site now called Sellafield. In her speech
she hailed it as "the world's first peaceful use of nuclear power".

It was nothing of the sort. The reactor was designed to produce weapons
grade plutonium for Britain's nuclear weapons programme.

It generated some power as a by-product. That power was used within the
Windscale site. However, as Windscale/Sellafield have always been
massive net importers of power from the National Grid, not one kWh of
Calder Hall's output was ever used outside Windscale/Sellafield.

In January 1987, in accordance with the traditional "30 year rule",
sensitive official government papers from 1956 were released to the
media. Apparently, when the untruth of the Queen's speech at Calder
Hall became clear, Her Majesty was not best pleased.

Which is why it was effing expensive, to build, run and decommission.


Yet you hold it out as an example of what new nuclear srations would be
like.

Cherry picking to prove a point, Not facing facts.