Stop the government building Nuclear power stations

In this video we see water cooling towers from a nuclear plant.
Petition 2008 onwards.
Stop plans to build nuclear power stations it is a fact that the waste form nuclear power plants are immensely toxic to all living things, and takes many thousands of years to become even relatively safe. The government are not only proposing to build more Nuclear power plants, but also to pay councils a fee to store the industries highly toxic waste in supposedly secure underground bunkers. This is a legacy that we the public do not want to pass on to ours and others children. Chernobyl is proof that these facilities are not failsafe and the resulting impact on people and the environment was irreparable. For more information about Civilian Nuclear accidents see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents
For military Nuclear accidents see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents
There are still many options open besides using nuclear energy and fossil fuels, and the Government should take all steps to utilise these rather than using methods that can have very grave consequences for humans and the environment.
Sign the petition;
Link
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/antinuclear/

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• news
• political
• commercial
• radfax
• nuclear
• atomic
• industry
• pollution
• action
• active
• polotics
• petitions

[radfax]

The governments have plans drawn up to negotiate contracts with local boroughs, councilors and officials to facillitae storage bunkers in urban areas.

There is another way, a more holistic way, we are in the forefront of innovation and secured progression if we seize the moment and the opportunity. Wind power, solar power, along with many other technological advancements can indeed provide solutions both in the short and long term

[radfax]

Question?

Where are they going to put all the nuclear waste????

[xxBAMSTERxx]

i say yes when you think of how many power stations there are and the fact that you can only name chernobyl makes them seem pretty safe. i think greenpeace would like to talk to you.

[radfax]

Do your research pup

[hiraku0n]

Since when did any gov. say they are build more RBMKs? No agency will allow such reactor without a containment building be build not to mention that RMBK had a + feedback design.

The obvious answer to climate change is to replace fossile fuel plants with nuclear.

Indeed, share information but not anti-nuke propaganda; at least get your nuclear basic straight. Global warming by GHG is by far more serious threat than any nuclear waste, as these are within engineering control.

[radfax]

You should do some research on hydrogen and its potential as a renewable energy source, there are many other steps being taken in researching other methods for sustainable renewable, green energies. Besides this you seem to be missing the point, that is that the governments of the EU are adopting proposals to build nuclear waste storage bunkers underneath you homes.

[DethWshBkr]

Also, what caused Chernobyl? VERY VERY VERY poor safety and regulatory controls.

Comparison of apples to oranges.

I lived literally 15 minutes from Three Mile Island (surely that one rings a bell too!), yes, it was a malfunction, but a contained malfunction, and during a time when we still were learning about nuclear power. Done properly, Nuclear is by far the best option

What are we to do for energy if we do not increse our nuclear capacity? More coal, or the insufficient solar/wind?

[dacowboys81]

Chernobal was 30 some years ago. Safety standards have risen since then and a meltdown is almost a nonfacter. Its cheap and clean energy. The biproducts are steam(god knows thats bad) and nuclear waste, which we are finding ways to better get rid of and even reuse.

[coldarc]

our entire universe is powered with electric currents and all matter in it is in a state of ionized plasma. even atoms behave like plasma. its a nebula like environment. nuclear elements is produced in stars at low temperatures and is caused by strong electric currents that produce cold electricity. what we use to power powerplants is fuels that is already processed in stars only to convert it back into electricity. why not extract the electric currents directly from our own ionosphere?

[Theaverable]

Nuclear is the future.

[MarsMoonEuropa]

@DethWshBkr YEAH! It's like, should we ban road building because 12 million people died building one in Russia?

The Greens are manipulative tyrants.

[MarsMoonEuropa]

@radfax Storage Bunkers.

I'm going on a holiday to see one that's a laboratory in Sweden. I'm looking forward to it - it looked so pretty in the pictures!

[LukeNAESA10]

Wind and solar are total shit nuclear all the way.

[xmichiganfanx]

Seriously? Wind and solar? WHat are we trying to power a calculator? I assumed we needed to power cities and the best, greenest choice is nuclear power by far.

[trekbiker91]

@radfax hydrogen is an energy storage technology, not a way to produce energy

[zassounotsukushi]

Your video is of a coal plant.

Observe the flue gas stack and conveyor system on the left. Nuclear plants have no tall, thin chimney putting out pollution, only the cooling towers, which I'm assuming are the reason you mistook this plant for a nuclear plant.

[bumpas11]

Say NO to what? Science? Progress? Reason? I've got a better idea. Say NO to fear-mongering and technological ignorance. Join the modern human race or stay in your cave and watch it go by.

Chernobyl design is history. There is no evidence that anything like it could ever happen in the west. It was only possible in Russia or another closed-minded country where the "govt" controlled your every thought. Simply not possible elsewhere, physically or in any other way of thinking.