Redt Energy Share Discussion Threads

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:57

It concludes that based on records now available, some 985,000 people died, mainly of cancer, as a result of the Chernobyl accident. That is between when the accident occurred in 1986 and 2004. More deaths, it projects, will follow.

The book explodes the claim of the International Atomic Energy Agency– still on its website that the expected death toll from the Chernobyl accident will be 4,000. The IAEA, the new book shows, is under-estimating, to the extreme, the casualties of Chernobyl.

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:54

Errm, 20 trillion yens worth?

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:53

Japan's government estimates the cost of cleaning up radioactive contamination and compensating victims of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster has more than doubled, reports say. The latest estimate from the trade ministry put the expected cost at some 20 trillion yen ($180bn, £142bn).28 Nov 2016

How much renewable would that buy????

when it goes wrong the costs can spiral out of control..... as can the loss of life...

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:52

Dig, can't you take an extra abort for your paranoia, it's pretty bad today.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:50

I see we have a couple of fossil fuel kings resident here, so you 2 have either sold wanting in cheaper, or work for the fosil fuel industry........even if fossil fuels were the only way of generation...REDT,s storage machines would have a use....so you 2 flogging a dead horse...

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:49

I looked outside. The grid isn't toast.

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:48

Green, nuke cleanup costs are ridiculously high due to ridiculous levels of defining dangerous waste with lower activity than many have as normal background radiation. Guess who scaremongers to get the public to demand even simple rags are treated as deadly radioactive waste needing extremely expensive high grade disposal strategies.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:41

If you worked for NGC design then the grid is toast !!!


Pierre Oreilly21 Feb '17 - 11:19 - 12844 of 12853 0 0
Dig, I worked for the ngc design authority and sat on expert committees for the most complex problems the grid face. For many reasons, you cannot fully, or even half, replace dispatchable generation such as nukes with intermittent generation such as windmill.

If you and the guardian say you can, then you and them are wrong.

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:41

Dig, I think we all know the types of things green websites say. I think there is growing realisation in the public that much of what they say is technically wrong and just promotional greenwash. You could cut and paste for eternity from green websites - oh, you are doing - but there's no real information there. Germany is now building many coal power stations due to the mess wind has caused, Spain is nearly bankrupt in a large part due to the energy policy, and bills in the UK are rising at an unaffordable rate due to wind.

All we get from you Cass is uninformed peurile guff, which turns away any red investors.ignorance isn't attractive at all.

[greenmachine2] 21/2/2017 11:40

RE post dlg3 re post 12840

It took a time to find the report referred to by the guardian, broken link in article but here it is


REDT shareholders and I am one can judge if they are remotely interested if the Guardian report and dlg3 assertions of more expensive nuclear than renewables. The fact is baseload is needed ( low carbon in my view) and even the amazing REDT technology cannot make renewables baseload. Adding storage the the calculations for renewables is the only way the compare nuclear costs.

The intergenerational foundation are concerned with intergenerational fairness and it is the nuclear cleanup costs they are concerned about I think.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:36

Typically the ones who claim that wind and solar will bring trouble to the grid are the old players, who failed to take renewable energy seriously and over-invested in fossil fuel capacities instead. Renewable energy is now eating their profits and making their old business models out-of-date.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:33

Wind power was Spain's top source of electricity in 2013
Surge in wind power and hydropower drives emissions down by more than 23%, reports BusinessGreen

Remarkable new figures from Spain's grid operator have revealed that greenhouse gas emissions from the country's power sector are likely to have fallen 23.1% last year, as power generation from wind farms and hydroelectric plants soared.

Red Eléctrica de España (REE) released a preliminary report on the country's power system late last month, revealing that for "the first time ever, [wind power] contributed most to the annual electricity demand coverage". According to the figures, wind turbines met 21.1% of electricity demand on the Spanish peninsular, narrowly beating the region's fleet of nuclear reactors, which provided 21% of power.

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:33

I said nothing in contradiction to your response. You really are impossible dig. You reply well before you've had time to understand or think about what anyone else says.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:30

Market price aside, coal and nuclear power have huge hidden costs that aren’t included in the price that you and I pay for electricity.

We’re talking about the costs of water pollution, health impacts, the plant’s huge water footprint, and climate change.

For instance, in the United States, accounting for these hidden costs, conservatively doubles to triples the price of electricity from coal per kWh generated. In South Africa, the Energy utility Eskom is currently building a coal-fired power plant, and it’s estimated that the plant will cause damage of up to 5.7 bln US$ for every year it operates.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:28

what were you saying about nukes being replaced by windmills pierre......

New York Bets On Renewables To Replace Indian Point Nuclear Plant
January 13th, 2017

New York governor Andrew Cuomo announced plans this week to close the Indian Point nuclear power plant, which supplies electricity to New York City and surrounding areas. The plant’s two working reactors — which account for roughly 10 percent of the state’s power generation — are slated to go offline in 2020 and 2021, more than a decade ahead of schedule.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:24

Global nuclear electricity production in terawatt-hours per year (TWh/y) peaked in 2006. The percentage contribution of nuclear energy to global electricity peaked at 17.5% in 1993 and declined to under 11% in 2014. Nowadays annual global investment in nuclear is exceeded by investment in each of wind and solar. Over the past decade the number of global start-ups of new nuclear power reactors has been approximately balanced by the number of closures of existing reactors. While several European countries are phasing out nuclear energy, most growth in nuclear reactor construction is occurring in China, Russia, India and South Korea. (World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015)

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:23

Most existing nuclear power reactors are classified as Generation 2 and are widely regarded as obsolete. The current generations of new nuclear power stations are classified as Generation 3 and 3+. Only four Generation 3 reactors have operated, so far only in Japan, and their performance has been poor. No Generation 3+ reactor is operating, although two are under construction in Europe, four in the USA and several in China. All are behind schedule and over-budget – the incomplete European reactors are already triple their budgeted prices. Not one Generation 4 power reactor – e.g. fast breeder, integral fast reactor (IFR), small modular reactor – is commercially available. (World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015) So it can be argued that modern nuclear energy is not ready.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:22

greenmachin2 have you heard of the export market, it is possible these days to ship goods world wide, so wheather the market be UK, Australia, Saudi, Jordan, Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Nigeri, Uganda, they will have no problem supplying.....the rest of the world beside the UK...

[falia] 21/2/2017 11:19

GUYS SYM , NEWS LEAK VERY HARD TO BUY

[pierre oreilly] 21/2/2017 11:19

Dig, I worked for the ngc design authority and sat on expert committees for the most complex problems the grid face. For many reasons, you cannot fully, or even half, replace dispatchable generation such as nukes with intermittent generation such as windmill.If you and the guardian say you can, then you and them are wrong.

[dlg3] 21/2/2017 11:18

this one not from the Guadian greenmachine2 BTW !!!!

Renewable energy versus nuclear: dispelling the myths
May 31, 2016 by Mark Diesendorf

Don’t believe the spurious claims of nuclear shills constantly putting down renewables, writes Mark Diesendorf, Associate Professor of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies at UNSW Australia. Clean, safe renewable energy technologies have the potential to supply 100% of the world’s electricity demand – but the first hurdle is to refute the deliberately misleading myths designed to promote the politically powerful but ultimately doomed nuclear industry.