On 18/12/16 10:33, harry wrote:
On Saturday, 17 December 2016 18:43:47 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
harry wrote
Rod Speed wrote
harry wrote

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-te...-idUSKBN13Y047

Nuclear is NOT safe or cheap option.

Perfectly safe if you dont do really stupid stuff
like siting it where a tsunami can be a problem.

That's exactly where Hinkley Point is sited.

Dont get tsunamis there, stupid.


You really are a thicko aren't you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristo...l_floods,_1607

You really are a thicko aren't you?

"A chiselled mark remains showing that the maximum height of the water
was 7.74 metres above sea level"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristo...l_floods,_1607

Now look at what ****ed up Fukushima,

"The tsunami waves reached run-up heights (how far the wave surges
inland above sea level) of up to 128 feet (39 meters)"

http://www.livescience.com/39110-jap...ami-facts.html