Do you want to discuss boring politics? (225 Viewers)

[Sick Boy]

Looking like China is going to be hit by a big COVID surge as it still pretends to in late 2019/early 2020. Vaccine take up in the elderly is poor and the ongoing restrictions are just not tenable. More supply shock coming for the West.

Didn’t they also decline western vaccines?

 

---

[Saddlebrains]

Fuck them, let their country fall apart

If they were honest with the world when Covid initially began i believe hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide could have been saved, and any lockdown periods observed for less time, helping world economies recover quicker

 

[fernandopartridge]

Fuck them, let their country fall apart

If they were honest with the world when Covid initially began i believe hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide could have been saved, and any lockdown periods observed for less time, helping world economies recover quicker

We're too reliant on goods manufactured in China for that to happen, I actually hope that somehow they are not as badly affected as it can be as it will be a problem for the rest of us.

What were they dishonest about?

 

[PVA]

Fuck the Tories

 

[wingy]

Feels like we're in the midst of a Greek tragedy.

 

[Skybluefaz]

You do know how modern nuclear reactors are built don’t you?

Toxic emasculinity

 

[JAM See]

You do know how modern nuclear reactors are built don’t you?

Ah, little hobby horse of mine.

Nobody knows how to build a modern nuclear reactor.

I'd say nobody knows how to build a bicycle from scratch.

The world is now full of experts in a particular field.

When I buy a bike, I expect that the expertise has been managed across the various fields that contribute to the final product.

I expect, and trust, the same of aeroplanes and nuclear reactors.

 

[shmmeee]

Ah, little hobby horse of mine.

Nobody knows how to build a modern nuclear reactor.

I'd say nobody knows how to build a bicycle from scratch.

The world is now full of experts in a particular field.

When I buy a bike, I expect that the expertise has been managed across the various fields that contribute to the final product.

I expect, and trust, the same of aeroplanes and nuclear reactors.

The point is they’re significantly safer than soviet tech or ones built fifty years ago.

 

[JAM See]

The point is they’re significantly safer than soviet tech or ones built fifty years ago.

I concur.

People bleating on about the 'dangers' of nuclear, but espousing the use of coal, gas, wood etc. have NO IDEA of the science behind it all, and more importantly, as I said earlier, could not by themselves, deliver any improvement to ANY product or service currently in use (from scratch).

 

[duffer]

It says nuclear is safer than hydro and wind and significantly safer than fossil fuels:

View attachment 27495

I'm a bit pushed today, but how on earth can Nuclear be classed as safer than renewables if we're counting deaths and side effects due to Chernobyl?

Now you could argue that the technology has moved on since then, but any process capable of this level of devastation in a single incident can hardly be called 'safe' when compared to, say, a wind turbine.

I'm not anti-nuclear per se, my bigger questions would be cost of installation, lead time, and cost of decommissioning, but pitching it as safer than renewable alternatives like wind or tidal power doesn't ring true to me.

Effects of the Chernobyl disaster - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[chiefdave]

The point is they’re significantly safer than soviet tech or ones built fifty years ago.

There's definitely an image problem with the wider public and it's going to take more than telling them they're idiots to turn that around. That only works on here

 

[shmmeee]

There's definitely an image problem with the wider public and it's going to take more than telling them they're idiots to turn that around. That only works on here

That’s just for Philosoraptor

 

[shmmeee]

I'm a bit pushed today, but how on earth can Nuclear be classed as safer than renewables if we're counting deaths and side effects due to Chernobyl?

Now you could argue that the technology has moved on since then, but any process capable of this level of devastation in a single incident can hardly be called 'safe' when compared to, say, a wind turbine.

I'm not anti-nuclear per se, my bigger questions would be cost of installation, lead time, and cost of decommissioning, but pitching it as safer than renewable alternatives like wind or tidal power doesn't ring true to me.

Effects of the Chernobyl disaster - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Because it produces a lot of energy. As I said it’s shark attacks and plane crashes: big and scary when it happens but very very rare. And our animal brains aren’t good with those sorts of things.

I want to know who is dying from solar? Installers falling off the roof?

 

[clint van damme]

Because it produces a lot of energy. As I said it’s shark attacks and plane crashes: big and scary when it happens but very very rare. And our animal brains aren’t good with those sorts of things.

I want to know who is dying from solar? Installers falling off the roof?

Doing a Rod Hull as its sometimes referred to.
Never found out if emu pulled through.

 

[duffer]

Because it produces a lot of energy. As I said it’s shark attacks and plane crashes: big and scary when it happens but very very rare. And our animal brains aren’t good with those sorts of things.

I want to know who is dying from solar? Installers falling off the roof?

Not an entirely fair example, imho. A plane crash kills a few hundred people all at once, and you can clear up the mess in a few weeks.

A nuclear accident has the potential, as demonstrated by Chernobyl, to kill or injure thousands of people and take decades if not centuries to clean up. Gorbachev suggested that the sheer cost of dealing with it brought down the Soviet Union.

We might understand the science behind nuclear, but the people building, running, and checking the reactors are using their animal brains too, with all of the emotion, incompetence, tiredness, and occasional corruption that can imply.

To come back to your example, we've understood the science behind flight for over a century now, and yet planes still crash.

The risk of nuclear isn't a lack of knowledge about the science, it's the humans that have to apply it that introduce the problems, and getting it wrong can have vast consequences.

 

[shmmeee]

Not an entirely fair example, imho. A plane crash kills a few hundred people all at once, and you can clear up the mess in a few weeks.

A nuclear accident has the potential, as demonstrated by Chernobyl, to kill or injure thousands of people and take decades if not centuries to clean up. Gorbachev suggested that the sheer cost of dealing with it brought down the Soviet Union.

We might understand the science behind nuclear, but the people building, running, and checking the reactors are using their animal brains too, with all of the emotion, incompetence, tiredness, and occasional corruption that can imply.

To come back to your example, we've understood the science behind flight for over a century now, and yet planes still crash.

The risk of nuclear isn't a lack of knowledge about the science, it's the humans that have to apply it that introduce the problems, and getting it wrong can have vast consequences.

But for the number of reactors there’s been very few serious incidents which is why you’re pulling out one from 40 years ago that required people to override safety systems. Systems that have fail safes in modern reactors.

The bottom line is for base load it’s fossil fuels or nuclear and fossil fuels are significantly more dangerous.

 

[JAM See]

Forget money. Forget return on investment. Forget Neo-Liberal dogma.

As Rishi demonstrated in 2020: There 'is' a magic money tree (basically a mortgage).

What's important is man made climate change.

A two bob risk analysis on the back of a fag packet would tell anybody that in the short/medium term the world needs to wean itself off fossil fuels.

Nuclear is a no brainer, use the magic money tree (mortgage) to pay for it.

 

[shmmeee]

Forget money. Forget return on investment. Forget Neo-Liberal dogma.

As Rishi demonstrated in 2020: There 'is' a magic money tree (basically a mortgage).

What's important is man made climate change.

A two bob risk analysis on the back of a fag packet would tell anybody that in the short/medium term the world needs to wean itself off fossil fuels.

Nuclear is a no brainer, use the magic money tree (mortgage) to pay for it.

Kill the Green Homes Grant cos it costs £2bns, spend hundreds of billions on the Energy Price Guarantee instead. Good old Tory fiscal conservatism.

 

[fernandopartridge]

But for the number of reactors there’s been very few serious incidents which is why you’re pulling out one from 40 years ago that required people to override safety systems. Systems that have fail safes in modern reactors.

The bottom line is for base load it’s fossil fuels or nuclear and fossil fuels are significantly more dangerous.

In fairness to the Soviet Union there are still a few Soviet era ones going without incident, 15 according to wiki

 

[hill83]

If nuclear reactors are safe explain Hiroshima

 

[hill83]

And planes, planes did it, planes aren't safe

 

[JAM See]

If nuclear reactors are safe explain Hiroshima

I nearly bit there.

Very good.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I nearly bit there.

Very good.

War and nuclear power don't go together though. Panic at the disco when Russian forces start shelling around a Ukrainian nuclear reactor.

 

[shmmeee]

War and nuclear power don't go together though. Panic at the disco when Russian forces start shelling around a Ukrainian nuclear reactor.

And yet despite being murderous savages directed by a lunatic, even they managed to avoid an incident.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

And yet despite being murderous savages directed by a lunatic, even they managed to avoid an incident.

By knowing the consequence if they continued. And said lunatic has not been that much of a lunatic... yet.

 

[shmmeee]

In fairness to the Soviet Union there are still a few Soviet era ones going without incident, 15 according to wiki

Still by definition at least 30 year old tech was my point.

 

[shmmeee]

By knowing the consequence if they continued. And said lunatic has not been that much of a lunatic... yet.

Again if Putin invades the U.K. we’ve got much bigger problems.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Again if Putin invades the U.K. we’ve got much bigger problems.

Sure the Ukrainians will be relieved at that.

 

[shmmeee]

Sure the Ukrainians will be relieved at that.

im lost

 

[clint van damme]

Rishi Sunak declares 'golden era' between UK and China is over

Speaking at the Lord Mayor's Banquet, the prime minister puts forward his position on foreign policy and doubles down on appearing strong against China after being criticised for being too soft on the Chinese government during the leadership campaign.

news.sky.com

And with no FTD with the States on the horizon that's basically any chance Brexit had of being an economic success fucked.

 

[shmmeee]

Rishi Sunak declares 'golden era' between UK and China is over

Speaking at the Lord Mayor's Banquet, the prime minister puts forward his position on foreign policy and doubles down on appearing strong against China after being criticised for being too soft on the Chinese government during the leadership campaign.

news.sky.com

And with no FTD with the States on the horizon that's basically any chance Brexit had of being an economic success fucked.

Did you see Truss’ Japan deal actually reduced trade? Amazing.

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Did you see Truss’ Japan deal actually reduced trade? Amazing.

And even Tories are admitting the Australian one is a disaster.

 

[shmmeee]

And even Tories are admitting the Australian one is a disaster.

But an entirely different disaster because it gives away more than it gets. It takes some skill to be this spectacularly bad at everything they try. This is what happens when you put domestic poll ratings above everything else. It’s all been about “the project” since 2016 Brexit first country second.

Apparently the Australia deal was given some mad political timescale by Truss (G7 appearance or something?) then she literally went to the Aussies and said “what do you want to get it done by this date?” And they took us to the cleaners.

 

[fernandopartridge]

But an entirely different disaster because it gives away more than it gets. It takes some skill to be this spectacularly bad at everything they try. This is what happens when you put domestic poll ratings above everything else. It’s all been about “the project” since 2016 Brexit first country second.

Apparently the Australia deal was given some mad political timescale by Truss (G7 appearance or something?) then she literally went to the Aussies and said “what do you want to get it done by this date?” And they took us to the cleaners.

It's this sort of story that makes me want to see the entire British news media to be removed along with the Tories

 

[Deleted member 9744]

But an entirely different disaster because it gives away more than it gets. It takes some skill to be this spectacularly bad at everything they try. This is what happens when you put domestic poll ratings above everything else. It’s all been about “the project” since 2016 Brexit first country second.

Apparently the Australia deal was given some mad political timescale by Truss (G7 appearance or something?) then she literally went to the Aussies and said “what do you want to get it done by this date?” And they took us to the cleaners.

Yes but we know it's all the fault of those remainers. Same will be true about the loss of the employment protections we had as part of the EU.