• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "UK nuclear support fades after Japan quake"

Collapse

  • scooterscot
    replied
    Originally posted by shaunbhoy View Post
    You might want to learn how to spell it then!!!

    it

    Leave a comment:


  • scooterscot
    replied
    Originally posted by shaunbhoy View Post
    You might want to learn how to spell it then!!!

    Quantitive, an adjective term for quantitative.

    Leave a comment:


  • shaunbhoy
    replied
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    I perform quantitive risk assessments for a living.
    You might want to learn how to spell it then!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    Keep laughing.

    The outcome of a risk assessment grounded a aircraft earlier this year that would have otherwise been allowed to continue flying until an in flight shut occurred.
    My goodness, they'd have been up there all day then if they had gone and taken off.

    Leave a comment:


  • scooterscot
    replied
    Originally posted by Cliphead View Post
    God help yer clients
    Keep laughing.

    The outcome of a risk assessment grounded a aircraft earlier this year that would have otherwise been allowed to continue flying until an in flight shut down occurred.
    Last edited by scooterscot; 6 July 2011, 14:30.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cliphead
    replied
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    I perform quantitive risk assessments for a living.
    God help yer clients

    Leave a comment:


  • scooterscot
    replied
    Originally posted by Cliphead View Post
    You really don't have a clue do you?

    I perform quantitive risk assessments for a living.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cliphead
    replied
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    We've ran out of space we now need to build houses way up in the mountains?



    Turns out Tsunami was not the only force of nature I was thinking of; what about man? What if a terrorist targeted a reactor with an explosive? Contamination could spread over a wide area. 5 reactors in the south of England, wait for the right wind conditions and London is a ghost town.



    If it's made by man it is fallible. I don't know of any other MIP where the outcome can be so devastating.
    You really don't have a clue do you?

    Leave a comment:


  • scooterscot
    replied
    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    And hydro-electric means you lose the land straight away.
    We've ran out of space we now need to build houses way up in the mountains?

    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    Even when the tulipe hits the fan on that scale, nobody is killed or seriously injured.
    Turns out Tsunami was not the only force of nature I was thinking of; what about man? What if a terrorist targeted a reactor with an explosive? Contamination could spread over a wide area. 5 reactors in the south of England, wait for the right wind conditions and London is a ghost town.

    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    Can any other major industrial processes claim to be that safe?
    If it's made by man it is fallible. I don't know of any other MIP where the outcome can be so devastating.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    Originally posted by original PM View Post
    So yes nuclear is the way to go - ask the French
    Est-nucléaire du chemin à parcourir singe fromage?

    And if their nukes blow, we'd get fallout anyway, with a favourable north westerly.

    Leave a comment:


  • original PM
    replied
    ahem

    Coal power plants continually produce more radioactive waste than nuclear plants

    Linky

    And as we do not live on a fault line the chances of a disaster similar to Japan are pretty much 0

    So yes nuclear is the way to go - ask the French

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
    A massive radiation dose increases your risk of cancer by 10%, smoking increases your risk of lung cancer by 1000%.
    Is that supposed to be tongue in cheek?

    Leave a comment:


  • shaunbhoy
    replied
    Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
    Couldn't agree more and those designs were >40 years old.
    WFBS

    Good to see that the more level-headed posters are all drawing the same pragmatic conclusions. Now if we can just settle the panicky Sun-reading ones down somehow.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fred Bloggs
    replied
    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    What would be the effect of a major accident at a coal fired power station? Would you be able to build houses and schools on the land afterwards?

    And hydro-electric means you lose the land straight away.

    Fukushima was hit by one of the biggest earthquakes on record, followed by a huge tsunami that devastated cities and killed 20,000 people, which in disaster stakes is as bad as it gets. And what happened? Nobody died, in fact none of the workers and certainly none of the public received any significant amount of radiation other than the two workers who had some minor burns from contaminated water.

    Even when the tulipe hits the fan on that scale, nobody is killed or seriously injured. Can any other major industrial processes claim to be that safe? It's crazy that people are more scared of nuclear power after Fukushima; they should be reassured by what happened.
    Couldn't agree more and those designs were >40 years old.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlasterBates
    replied
    A massive radiation dose increases your risk of cancer by 10%, smoking increases your risk of lung cancer by 1000%.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X