CO2 Emissions from Electrical Generation: 1980 to 2030

[intaglio]

11. At first, yes, I did think you were being supportive

I did realise my mistake but unfortunately in the edit I forgot to remove stuff that might have seemed critical or change the tone of the post. Sorry I got that wrong.

On first reading I realised that you had left out arguments against nuclear. I saw a need to include the data about the delays and costs of building "radioactive tea kettles". I concentrated on the delays, because the UK is good for documenting that sort of stuff, and hoped you or someone else would post about excess and unrecognised subsidies or the possibilities for energy reduction in other areas or other generating options which must be developed.

TBH I find certain people in this forum entirely too forgiving of the nuclear option and so I can post longish screeds because it is vastly important that the nuclear plant are not built. I understand the attraction of nuclear for 18 months ago (or less) I would have been on the side of the devils but I had been wavering for a couple of years. Nuclear is the easy option, an existing technology that industry supports and that would fit into current infrastructure but the level of risk over the lifetimes of these dinosaurs is too high.