“Nuclear for all its technological attractiveness should not be pursued, we are a small Island, a Chernobyl like event would destroy us.”

France is littered with Nuclear Power-stations. If they had a serious Chernobyl type accident, there would still be the potential that the UK would be irradiated.

I know we are owned lock stock and barrel by the EU these days, thank you Mr Cameron, but that isn’t really a case for being energy dependent if we don’t have to be.

“Contrary to what the Petrochemical Lobby would have us believe, the CO2 released when burning Veg Oil is only that which was fixed from the atmoshphere during the previous growing season, so you are only putting back, what the plant took out, IE no net CO2 gain to the Atmosphere.”

Do these plants drip oil? Or does the plant biomass have to be processed in an energy intensive manner?

“This is all a Con, Nuclear is dangerous and will not benefit we the people, it will enslave us, which is the intention.”

Of course the people will benefit from Nuclear power. Without intending to be rude I think you are just a little paranoid.

We need to reduce our demand. Get the lights off in the middle of the night, insulate all our houses, impose high building standards with respect to home insulation. There’s a few power stations saved. We should burn our coal – like the Americans, Chinese and Indians will all be doing – until such times as we have a safe way of producing power which does not depend on foreign supplies of raw material.

There are rivers we can stick turbines in. There are ideal geothermal sites from which heat can be extracted. There is a tidal bore up the Severn, and there are tidal waters around our shores. I suspect that if we spent some of the billions we are intending to give to Frenchmen and Japanese in exchange for their reactors we could well solve our problem of energy without recourse to any dangerous, foreign dependent means.

Canute couldn’t stop the tide any more than Britain not burning its coal is going to stop it.

Do you think Liebour in opposition will rediscover its opposition to Nuclear? Like I expect in opposition they would have opposed their illegal wars?

I think we need to sort the energy issue out and start modernising the nuclear generation option. There are other options like more local energy solutions. My consipiracy theory is that power generation remains big to suit the big energy companies. Solar and wind power could be as local as your TV aeriel which should help Dave’s mate Zac. It will also mean the Conservatives avoid ripping up too many local beauty spots to build nuclear plants in Conservative held constituencies.

It is Perhaps more interesting to look at who owns most of the Worlds Uranium to find out why we are going Nuclear, Who benefits, certainly not the Farmer, the Taxpayer or the Customer.

What would be wrong with driving to your local farmer to fill up you car, I regularly used to fill up my diesel car on Veg Oil bought straight from Tescos shelf.
That was before Clarckson spilled the Beans on National TV and the Price of Veg oil went from 50p per litre to over £1 per litre where it remains today.
With a sensible population balance what would be wrong with planting tens of Billions of trees, I see nothing wrong with Log Fires but the Govt does, a log fire and a local farmer to buy or barter for food and fuel for your family makes you independent of Government, can you tax firewood, found in your local wood, well if they can Tax CO2 I suppose they would try of course.
And the CO2 released when burning wood, again, only that which was absorbed by the tree during its growing season.
If Gordon wants to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere using Carbon Capture technology, there can be no more beautiful carbon capture technology than Tens of Billions of trees.

Burning Petrochems dumps Extra CO2 into the atmosphere that was absorbed Millions of years ago.

This is all a Con, Nuclear is dangerous and will not benefit we the people, it will enslave us, which is the intention.

People are going to have learn to live off grid, because the Elites are intent on trapping us in large cities, Dependant on Globally controlled Energy, Food, Water and Fuel Suppliers.

The trouble is, every which way they try to get off Grid, the Govt will put up Barriers.

The trouble, by only espousing the Petrochemical Lobby view, they and the Govt can convince the mass public mind that they are correct, it does not matter if a few, or even if thousands know different, so long as most of the population can be hoodwinked by the Propaganda.

We are being farmed.

Other claims about manufacturing cost,, decomissioning cost, accidents, radioactivity, CO2 produced, the time it takes radiation to decay, etc etc etc are equally untrue. Matthew hopkins was no more dishonest about witchcraft than most of our media is about nuclear & indeed about progressive technology generally.

If there is even an outside chance of a site which could flood, then surely it should be an absolute no to any construction of any sort of power station, let alone nuclear.

On the other hand perhaps Mr Milliband does not really believe that global warming is real, and the suggested flood threats really negligable.

The true cost of nuclear power are as yet unclear, as not all of the costs ever seem to be included in any calculation.

I don’t think we are at the bottom of the barrel yet!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6831562.ece

So lets take a tally.

Lists 3 possible commercial links for Labour figures – one has not yet been confirmed and one does not tally with Register of Members Interests – ed.

This is a strategic industry and to sell it undermines our status as a seperate nation state.”

And there you have your answer.

Personally, I suggest we do what they did with the railways – authorise them by way of a bill in parliament.

And get rid of this incompetent and dithering mess of a Government.

Yes, this was at the back of my mind too, but sometimes you need to recognise sensible behaviour. The Tories up until David Cameron have been reasonably sound on Nuclear energy.

It would be amusing in a perverse sort of way if after being sensible on this policy for years, the new Tory leader and his Eco (word left out) chum Zak fall out over this one.

If we sold our nuclear industry to the French, why did we do so? This is a strategic industry and to sell it undermines our status as a seperate nation state. If we are serious about remaining a nation state, this is one of the items to be addressed in Mr Cameron’s renegotiation. Limiting it to Lisbon will not do.

I can see the announcement in a few months: “I can now announce that the government is making a decision at this stage to go ahead with the investigation into these proposals. The next step is a feasibility study. The report of the feasibility study will of course be subject to consultation with stakeholders. Since we believe that Britain’s energy supplies should come from a diversified mix of sources, we are today announcing contracts for 12 new combined cycle gas fired power stations. These will be state-of-the-art energy-efficient sources of power, which will make a major contribution to Britain’s carbon reduction targets.”