Archive for the 'Caspar' Category
Posted: Wednesday, July 19th, 2006 @ 7:42 pm in Blog, Caspar | 2 Comments »
Not always the quickest kid on the block, I am one of those still coming to terms with the UK government’s Energy Review and its possible ramifications. I aim to make some more considered comments in an upcoming article for Interactions, the IOP’s member newspaper, that will also reflect a few thoughts from Kat, […]
Posted: Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 @ 2:18 pm in Blog, Caspar | 7 Comments »
In Nuclear future, Gia lists objections to nuclear power as follows:
‘Nuclear power is dangerous’
‘Nuclear power is unsafe’
‘If attacked by terrorists, nuclear power plants can explode and kill millions’
‘Radiation is the most dangerous thing on the planet’
‘Chernobyl could happen here’
But this misrepresents of the views of reasonable people opposed to nuclear new build in the […]
Posted: Tuesday, July 11th, 2006 @ 9:25 am in Blog, Caspar | 7 Comments »
So, the energy review has been published. It says, as expected, that Britain should build new nuclear power stations as well as renewables. It also contains some language about getting power companies to sell heat and light to their customers rather than just energy — something from which advocates of demand management may take a […]
Posted: Monday, July 10th, 2006 @ 11:56 am in Blog, Caspar | No Comments »
Just after the stroke of midnight last night, and just a day head of the expected publication of the government’s energy review, the Trade and Industry Select Committee released their report on the future of the UK nuclear power (see here).
At first glance, it looks like the report may have something to please both supporters […]
Posted: Wednesday, July 5th, 2006 @ 9:05 pm in Blog, Caspar | 7 Comments »
The debate over which energy technology is best suited to meet UK demand reminds me sometimes of a quip by W C Fields. Asked whether he liked children, he is reported to have replied “Ah yes…boiled or fried”.
So, with UK energy, some people recommend more nuclear power while others say renewables such […]
Posted: Sunday, July 2nd, 2006 @ 10:59 pm in Blog, Caspar | 2 Comments »
“Britain could be spared a mass building programme of nuclear power stations under plans to force power companies to reduce energy use and help the public cut their fuel bills” — Nuclear cutback in energy plans (The Observer 2 July)
Unlike England`s world cup chances, the UK nuclear debate may not quite be over.
dating single chatmsn […]
Posted: Saturday, July 1st, 2006 @ 2:15 pm in Blog, Caspar | 2 Comments »
Peter Hain has “broken rank with the Cabinet to express doubts about building new nuclear power stations”. In an interview with the BBC he said if there had to be nuclear power it must work without huge public subsidy, which should be spent on renewable energy instead.
Peter Hain is a middle to heavyweight in […]
Posted: Thursday, June 29th, 2006 @ 11:22 am in Blog, Caspar | 15 Comments »
What if all of your friends had iPods but you couldn’t afford one because in the mid 70s you had mortgaged your house to invest in a company that was going to conquer the world with the next generation of 8-track technology?
In other words, there can be downsides to locking yourself into a particular technology […]
Posted: Wednesday, June 21st, 2006 @ 3:09 pm in Blog, Caspar | 12 Comments »
Here´s a challenge for those who think nuclear new build in the UK now makes sense.
Please provide a detailed, point-by-point, evidence-based refutation of the arguments advanced by Menzies (”Ming”) Campbell and the Liberal Democrats, and detailed in their 12 page report here.
Posted: Wednesday, June 21st, 2006 @ 12:59 pm in Blog, Caspar | No Comments »
In Nuclear power is a renewable Gia says that the world has an infinite supply of uranium, and proposes that ‘energy conservation’ goes against everything it means to be ‘Human’. Kat examines the first of these assertions, and commentators reply, in So how much have we actually got? I guess that […]