Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980

On 06/09/16 12:15, bm wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980


All part of the current assault on anything that makes electricity.

Except windmills. But they don't make electricity either.



--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:26:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980


All part of the current assault on anything that makes electricity.


Was there anything of substance in the programme or was it one of
those where upon discovering a disused bog with a leaking cistern in
some no longer used corner makes out we are all going to die?


G.Harman

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:26:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980


All part of the current assault on anything that makes electricity.


Was there anything of substance in the programme or was it one of
those where upon discovering a disused bog with a leaking cistern in
some no longer used corner makes out we are all going to die?

It's just a tad worse than that.
Give it a watch.

En el artículo , damduck-
escribió:

Was there anything of substance in the programme

Yes, quite a bit, but the programme wasn't helped by the idiot presenter
going into full-on John Humphreys attack dog mode, nor by the series of
unconvincing chinless wonders trotted out to defend Sellafield and the
American conglomerate contracted to run it (who were sacked in April
this year).

The programme would have had more impact if it had been more even-handed
and not presented in the usual "it's noocular = we're all doomed!
DOOOMED!!" tone.

To be fair to Sellafield, they're still dealing with the legacy of the
first forays into nuclear reactors in the 50s - there were several shots
of the one remaining Windscale Pile, with Cockroft's Folly at the top.

or was it one of
those where upon discovering a disused bog with a leaking cistern in
some no longer used corner makes out we are all going to die?

A little more worrying than that. They're got deteriorating concrete
silos full of waste built in the 50s which were only ever intended to be
temporary. Plans were laid to clear them using a robotic arm and
repackage the waste at a cost of £200 mill, but were abandoned. The
chinless wonders were rather evasive when asked what the current plans
for the silos are.

The main concern seems to be the open storage ponds built in the 50s in
which waste is kept under water. Much of it has corroded into a toxic
sludge at the bottom and by the sounds of what the Sellafield people
themselves said, the ponds have "hundreds" of cracks, some of which are
leaking radioactive liquor.

The programme was basically a scaremongering hatchet job and would have
reflected much better on the BBC if it had been presented in a calmer
and more even-handed manner.

To be sure, old Jim al-Khalili won't be getting an invite any time soon
to film "Inside Sellafield II".

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On 06/09/16 12:15, bm wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980



Thanks.

I am not surprised and yes, it is worrying. It's just has that
appallingly "British Leyland half-arsed" feel to it.

On 06/09/16 12:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/09/16 12:15, bm wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980



Thanks.

I am not surprised and yes, it is worrying. It's just has that
appallingly "British Leyland half-arsed" feel to it.

Of course, The BBC carefully crafted it to give that impression.


--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On 06/09/16 13:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/09/16 12:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/09/16 12:15, bm wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 05/09/16 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.



Care to summarise?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37255980



Thanks.

I am not surprised and yes, it is worrying. It's just has that
appallingly "British Leyland half-arsed" feel to it.

Of course, The BBC carefully crafted it to give that impression.



Or have they?

The problem is, I cannot just nonce into Sellafield to check (well, not
past the Visitor Centre and coach tour (do they still do that?).

On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

On Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:02:33 UTC+1, F wrote:
On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

How do YUO know it's over the top?

On 9/7/2016 7:40 AM, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:02:33 UTC+1, F wrote:
On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

How do YUO know it's over the top?


Well I have worked there, and *I* consider it OTT.

A few years ago I went around one of their facilities which was being
modified as part of a project which I had kicked off from another part
of the industry (one of their clients). This was when the plant
operators were showing the ONR around, to explain what they were doing,
and why. Even though it was associated with a significant improvement in
conditions as more modern technology was introduced, the ONR were very
searching in their scrutiny.

On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 15:57:15 UTC+1, newshound wrote:
On 9/7/2016 7:40 AM, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:02:33 UTC+1, F wrote:
On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

How do YUO know it's over the top?


Well I have worked there, and *I* consider it OTT.


Doing what?

On 9/7/2016 4:34 PM, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 15:57:15 UTC+1, newshound wrote:
On 9/7/2016 7:40 AM, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:02:33 UTC+1, F wrote:
On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

How do YUO know it's over the top?


Well I have worked there, and *I* consider it OTT.


Doing what?

Trying to find out if WAGR had any information relevent to specific CAGR
problems. Tapping their experience with lubricants. Advising them on
metrology. Advising them on paint. Coming up with a complete redesign
for the Calder Hall fuel route, to reduce the load it was putting on FHP.

On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 07:40:35 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 September 2016 17:02:33 UTC+1, F wrote:
On 05/09/2016 21:31, bm wrote:
Looks like another bunch of overpaid, thick-skinned, don't give a ****
*******.
I'm just amazed they let in the BBC.

After the over-the-top, over-dramatic presentation I wouldn't blame them.

--
F

How do YoU know it's over the top?

It says so in the article:

"Building B41 still houses the aluminium cladding for the uranium fuel rods of Piles 1 and 2, and is modelled on a grain silo, with waste tipped in at the top and argon gas added to prevent fires."