On 30/05/2013 07:15, harry wrote:
On May 29, 3:19 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 29/05/2013 08:42, harry wrote:

On May 28, 7:16 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 28/05/2013 07:20, harry wrote:
...

And still the nuclear waste problem is unsolved.

The only problem attached to nuclear waste is that people like you think
there is a problem.

Colin Bignell

If it wasn't a big problem, it would have been solved by now.

I rather doubt there is any solution to the problem of people, like you,
who refuse to believe the facts.

As for nuclear waste, we have had the technology to recycle 95% of it,
including all the high level waste, for more than half a century. It
just happens to be cheaper to store it safely instead.

Colin Bignell

Another one in Lala land.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-8479145.html

Notice who's paying.
The taxpayer.

As we would have if the plant had not been privatised. Essentially that
is a story about a government project that is over time and over budget,
which is hardly unusual.

And this is a tiny fraction of what's to come.

This is the result of Britain wanting to have nuclear weapons and
building the facilities to provide the fuel without any regard for
anything, bar meeting the deadline for demonstrating that they could
build an H-bomb.

It is in no way an indicator of what will happen in future with nuclear
power. All the clean up costs are included in the calculations for that
and are a major reason that nuclear power comes out at around the same
cost as coal power, although still half the cost of onshore wind and one
third the cost of offshore wind.

As I said, the only problem about nuclear waste is people like you who
think there is a problem.

Colin Bignell