Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

--
*Speak softly and carry a cellular phone *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Wrong type of wind?
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

--
*Speak softly and carry a cellular phone *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , at 12:23:44 on Sat, 10 Aug
2019, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

One nuclear power station for the whole country? My, what a big one.
--
Roland Perry

On 10/08/2019 12:23, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...


What do you mean all our eggs in one basket? I don't think they do.

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to the
problem last night.

On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:07:59 +0100, Pancho wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to the
problem last night.

Dave is unaware (as ever) the problem was actually caused by the EU's
*stoopid* renewable energy policy!



--
Leave first - THEN negotiate!

On 10/08/2019 13:07, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 12:23, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...


All nuclear power does not stop because th wind drops, or the sun goes down.

Once again itsd clear the plow**** is either terminally stupid or a liar
in the pay of Big Wind.


What do you mean all our eggs in one basket? I don't think they do.

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way that
thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.



--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first centurys developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 10/08/2019 13:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

I cant work out if they are stupid enough to believe them, or think
other people are.


--
€œit should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalins Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.€�

Vaclav Klaus

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

Ah, so that's why the population is increasing, ".... which effected
millions of people.". (I think you probably meant "affectead")

--
Chris Green
·

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...
Not just one nuclear power station. And, preferably, not just one
design of nuclear power station. This is not a new problem.

--

Roger Hayter

On 10/08/2019 15:46, Chris Green wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

Ah, so that's why the population is increasing, ".... which effected
millions of people.". (I think you probably meant "affectead")

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp403.pdf

On 10/08/2019 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way that
thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.


Weren't the French thinking that they should limit the total proportion
of nuclear power as they wanted a higher percentage of total generation
from sources that could switch on quickly, to load balance.

I wasn't entirely convinced.

On 10/08/2019 15:52, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:46, Chris Green wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

Ah, so that's why the population is increasing, ".... which effected
millions of people.".Â* (I think you probably meant "affectead")

Or even "affected"


http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp403.pdf


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

On 10/08/2019 15:57, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way
that thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.


Weren't the French thinking that they should limit the total proportion
of nuclear power as they wanted a higher percentage of total generation
from sources that could switch on quickly, to load balance.

I wasn't entirely convinced.

The 'best of all worlds' power is about 30% hydro 70% nuclear. 0% renewable.

France is close to that.



--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:46, Chris Green wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

Ah, so that's why the population is increasing, ".... which effected
millions of people.". (I think you probably meant "affectead")

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp403.pdf

You could be right! :-)

--
Chris Green
·

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:52, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:46, Chris Green wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

Ah, so that's why the population is increasing, ".... which effected
millions of people.".Â* (I think you probably meant "affectead")

Or even "affected"

Typical! :-)

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp403.pdf


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

--
Chris Green
·

I told them they should mass produce the ones in submarines and tow them to
where they are needed.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:23:44 on Sat, 10 Aug
2019, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

One nuclear power station for the whole country? My, what a big one.
--
Roland Perry

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

No one is proposing just the one nuke.

On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 04:40:43 +1000, jleikppkywk, better known as
cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


No one is proposing just the one nuke.

Oh, **** ...and this thread was Rodent-free, so far.

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2019 13:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

I cant work out if they are stupid enough to believe them,

Its is clear that the plow**** actually is that stupid. That
is also the reason that he's into unions and Labour.

or think other people are.

He's not smart enough for that.

Dense is, but the plow**** isnt.

On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 05:11:36 +1000, jleikppkywk, better known as
cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Its is clear that

The ONLY thing that is clear here is that you ARE a retarded senile trolling
pest!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:32:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to
the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

The nukes are running more or less flat out when they are online. And
how fast can they raise load if not? When one comes back after
refueling or statutary outage they seem to take a day or two to get
up to full chat.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way that
thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.

I wonder what the affect of Hornsea dropping off line when it's fully
built and running at its plated capacity of 6 GW... That's four times
the amount of capacity lost from the grid in this and the
Langannet/Sizewell incidents.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 10/08/2019 23:43, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:32:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to
the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

The nukes are running more or less flat out when they are online. And
how fast can they raise load if not? When one comes back after
refueling or statutary outage they seem to take a day or two to get
up to full chat.


You havce totally missed the point
The nukes are steam turbines. The rotational inertia will cover the grid
for a minute or twow while Dinorwig spools up.


It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way that
thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.

I wonder what the affect of Hornsea dropping off line when it's fully
built and running at its plated capacity of 6 GW... That's four times
the amount of capacity lost from the grid in this and the
Langannet/Sizewell incidents.

With luck it will neverget built...


--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 10/08/2019 18:27, Brian Gaff wrote:
I told them they should mass produce the ones in submarines and tow them to
where they are needed.
Brian


Rolls Royce aero-engines (who design and build the UK nuclear sub
power plants) are already suggesting this.

On 10/08/2019 16:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:57, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to
the problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way
that thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.


Weren't the French thinking that they should limit the total
proportion of nuclear power as they wanted a higher percentage of
total generation from sources that could switch on quickly, to load
balance.

I wasn't entirely convinced.

The 'best of all worlds' power is about 30% hydro 70% nuclear. 0%
renewable.

France is close to that.




Hydro *is* renewable. So is nuclear if the fuel is reprocessed and
used again.

On 11/08/2019 09:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/2019 23:43, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:32:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to
the
problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

The nukes are running more or less flat out when they are online. And
how fast can they raise load if not? When one comes back after
refueling or statutary outage they seem to take a day or two to get
up to full chat.


You havce totally missed the point
The nukes are steam turbines. The rotational inertia will cover the grid
for a minute or twow whileÂ* Dinorwig spools up.


Unless an electrical fault stops the power reaching the grid.
Unless it occurs at a time when the mountain reservoir has already
been used up.

The windmills didn't suddenly stop turning, an electrical 'situation'
took that farm off line.

And it's August, so most if not all the coal generators are off for
cleaning and maintenance.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way that
thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.

I wonder what the affect of Hornsea dropping off line when it's fully
built and running at its plated capacity of 6 GW... That's four times
the amount of capacity lost from the grid in this and the
Langannet/Sizewell incidents.

With luck it will neverget built...

On 10/08/2019 20:11, jleikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2019 13:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating
our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power
station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

I cant work out if they are stupid enough to believe them,

Its is clear that the plow**** actually is that stupid. That
is also the reason that he's into unions and Labour.

or think other people are.

He's not smart enough for that.

Dense is, but the plow**** isnt.

Replying to yourself again ???

In message , at 10:52:21 on Sun, 11 Aug
2019, Andrew remarked:

The nukes are steam turbines. The rotational inertia will cover the
grid for a minute or twow while* Dinorwig spools up.

Unless an electrical fault stops the power reaching the grid.
Unless it occurs at a time when the mountain reservoir has already
been used up.

And either of those co-inciding with one of these 10-yr events of two
generators going offline in a matter of minutes.

The windmills didn't suddenly stop turning, an electrical 'situation'
took that farm off line.

Have they published something about that (genuine question).

My own theory is that they weren't initially running flat out, but did
respond to a greater demand, which due to the high winds took some part
of the installation to the point it shut down for safety reasons. It
could have been the sails running away too fast.
--
Roland Perry

On 11/08/2019 10:48, Andrew wrote:
On 10/08/2019 16:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/2019 15:57, Pancho wrote:
On 10/08/2019 13:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Anyway, why do you think only having Nuclear power is relevant to
the problem last night.

Absdolutely if we had been all nuclear that would not have happened.

It was the lack of renewable generators to respond in the same way
that thermal plant can, to a sudden loss of generating power.


Weren't the French thinking that they should limit the total
proportion of nuclear power as they wanted a higher percentage of
total generation from sources that could switch on quickly, to load
balance.

I wasn't entirely convinced.

The 'best of all worlds' power is about 30% hydro 70% nuclear. 0%
renewable.

France is close to that.




Hydro *is* renewable. So is nuclear if the fuel is reprocessed and
used again.

You know what I meant.
0% INTERMITTENT renewables

And nuclear is NOT renewable. The uranium does get 'burnt'

The iunuverse is not renewable.

--
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow witted
man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest
thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly
persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid
before him."

- Leo Tolstoy

On 11/08/2019 10:53, Andrew wrote:
On 10/08/2019 20:11, jleikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2019 13:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in
generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power
station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

I cant work out if they are stupid enough to believe them,

Its is clear that the plow**** actually is that stupid. That
is also the reason that he's into unions and Labour.

or think other people are.

He's not smart enough for that.

Dense is, but the plow**** isnt.

Replying to yourself again ???

I am flattered that you think 'jleikppkywk' is in fact me, but sadly I
have to say that it is not.


--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...


All nuclear power does not stop because th wind drops, or the sun goes
down.

Except in France where it had to be stopped on a hot day.

Thanks for confirming your tunnel vision.

--
*The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating our
energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

Neither did I. Or do you think one wind farm could too? Or one gas fired
station?

--
*Modulation in all things *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

--
*WHY IS IT CALLED TOURIST SEASON IF WE CAN'T SHOOT AT THEM?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Roger Hayter wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Anyone see the irony of the recent power cut?

We are told by Turnip etc that wind power has no place in generating
our energy. As the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

Yes when we have a technical failure of a large windfarm, and a
conventional generator at the same time, we have a power cut which
effected millions of people.

But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...
Not just one nuclear power station. And, preferably, not just one
design of nuclear power station. This is not a new problem.

Why do you think 'eggs' refers to one?

--
*A person who smiles in the face of adversity probably has a scapegoat *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
The 'best of all worlds' power is about 30% hydro 70% nuclear. 0%
renewable.


FFS. Hydro isn't a renewable now in Turnip's world. Means we are going to
run out of water at some point. Then, power will be the least of your
worries.

--
*When companies ship Styrofoam, what do they pack it in? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 11/08/2019 12:33, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

That also depends on whether you think your basket should include all
the nukes over the UK.

You must have one big basket in mind.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

You miss the point. It is the increased vulnerability of the one basket
we are querying.


--

Roger Hayter

On 11/08/2019 12:43, Roger Hayter wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

You miss the point. It is the increased vulnerability of the one basket
we are querying.

And in terms of dependency of supply, nukes can make their own fuel up
to a point. The sea is also said to contain some 4,500 tons of Uranium.

Lots of eggs and numerous baskets come to mind.

On 11/08/2019 12:43, Roger Hayter wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

You miss the point. It is the increased vulnerability of the one basket
we are querying.


yep. Like when radioactive materials all cease to fission one day.

And you wish you had some gas.

It's the plow**** really that stupid? Like advocating in addition to
round wheels, square wheels and triangular wheels for 'diversity'

and advocating driving not just on the left, but the right and down the
middle of the road as well?

One presumes he has rtead that 'dibersity' addresses te 'wingle point of
failure' mode of multiple units.

I.e. when the wind doesnt blow and the sun doesnt shinbe, or we run out
of stored gas, or coal.

But there is no single point of failure fior all nuclear grids.



Or does he know he is telling lies?



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 11/08/2019 13:09, Fredxx wrote:
On 11/08/2019 12:43, Roger Hayter wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Â*Â*Â* The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But the nuclear lot want to put all our eggs in the one basket...

I don't think anyone has ever suggested on large nuclear power
station to
serve the entire country

I am perpetually amazed at the extraordinary statements made by
lefty****s, ecotards and remoaners. I mean they are nonsense even to
someone with subnormal learning skills.

And I'm even more amazed by how the likes of you don't understand a
common
enough saying.

But perhaps given the standard of your posts, you don't understand the
difference between an egg and eggs.

You miss the point.Â* It is the increased vulnerability of the one basket
we are querying.

And in terms of dependency of supply, nukes can make their own fuel up
to a point. The sea is also said to contain some 4,500 tons of Uranium.

Wrong, The sea contains 4,500 MILLION tonnes of uranium. Enough for
abput 5000 years of use at economically extractable rates.


Ther is 10 years worth of plutonium sitting at Sellafield


Lots of eggs and numerous baskets come to mind.



--
€œPeople believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, ones
agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
ones suitability to be taken seriously.€�

Paul Krugman