On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 08:42:29 -0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Bruce Farquhar
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 23:32:47 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"Bruce Farquhar" wrote in message
news On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 22:12:56 -0000, dpb wrote:

On 12/10/2018 1:08 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
"Bruce Farquhar" wrote in message
news ...

I said "We do have nuclear power stations which can and do explode...."
You said "Wrong."

Only Fukushima exploded.
...

And that was _NOT_ a nuclear explosion but conventional hydrogen gas
(which came from decomposition of water and collected). It isn't
physically possible to create a supercritcal mass from the low-enriched
commercial reactor fuel.

But don't commercial reactors create weapons grade stuff on behalf of the
military?

Nope, the stuff used in bombs is made in specific purpose nukes.

It's why the governments subsidise them in the first place.

Why the govt paid for them, yep.

Something in the power stations is required to make weapons. It may only be
the first step I'm not sure, but the subsidies were for weapons, not "cheap"
power. It's the same **** again now claiming solar is cheap. It's only cheap
when the greenie subsidies come in.

Which of course doesn't actually make things cheap. Just hides the cost.

Exactly. I (used to, not sure if it's still there) be able to choose different tarriffs from EDF (my power company) as to whether I wanted to fund green power or not. I always chose nuclear, mainly because it was cheaper for me.