Click to get your own widget

Saturday, October 21, 2006


A short Scotsman letter in response to somebody who had said that nuclear power would be dangerous for "10 to 20 times" its half life.

Unfortunately most of the figures have been edited out <> which, while allowing me to hit Mr Shelby hard deprives me of the chance to club him to death.
In claiming that radioactive waste is dangerous up to 20 times longer than its half life (letter 14th Oct) Mr Shelby is flying in the face of arithmetic.

Because half life means what it says the level of radioactivity halves 20 times in that period the radiation Mr Shelby fears would be literally undetectable

Thursday, October 19, 2006


Tories on Scots tax cuts


China in space

North Korea

Renewables grants

Grey squirrels

Airport expansion

Korean Bomb

The stocks as a substitute to prison


SNP economic policy

House (& bothy) price increases
Tories on PR

Alleged global warming


Hunterston nuclear closure

Anti-nuclear lies href="">

Monday, October 16, 2006


I noticed on Sunday that AM interviewed Nigel Farage new boss of UKIP in a blink & you'll miss it interview & then spent about 1o minutes on Jose Manuel Barroso, the president of the European commission (& not a word about his carer as a Time Lord) in which, among other things, he made his statement about it no longer being whether we are for or against Europe (he ment the EU).

Typical of the BBC that they give so much more time to this EU apparatchik than to the leader of the party that placed 3rd in the last UK election where the voters knew their votes would count (ie PR one).

Last EU election resultConservative 26.7

Labour 22.6

UK Independence Party 16.1

Liberal Democrat 14.9

Green 6.3

I got an email from UKIP a few days previously boasting that AM had interviewed the leaders of all the big parties & were now treating UKIP as the 4th of the big 3 but the interview was disgracefully short.

Sunday, October 15, 2006


I have just found this letter was in the Scotsman on 17th August. I don't know why I missed it. It is a gentle piss take on another form of renewable - tidal this time, which i point out is possible the best of a bad lot.
David G Guild's belief that tidal power will provide "serious opposition" to nuclear (Letters, 12 August) shows a logical weakness.

It may be, as he asserts, that the "anti-nuclear" Scottish Executive is ignoring tidal power because it is secretly pro-nuclear, and thus deliberately doing down alternatives. However, a simpler, if less paranoid, answer would be because even the Executive (or at least its advisers) can tell these are rubbish.

The problem with tidal power is that it only provides power for about ten hours each day, when the tide is actually moving in or out. That means you would have to build the nuclear or other stations and then switch them off for these ten hours to give the tidal station something to do. While this is clearly the most "serious" competition any form of "alternative" can give nuclear it isn't very serious.

The largest tidal station in the world was built in Rances by the French, where it performs exactly as advertised. The French then went on to build nuclear reactors to provide 85 per cent of their power at 1.5p a unit. Our own politicians should show such common sense.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.