NIMBY Tory

It seems it is the tories that are the most pro-nuclear when it comes to energy policies................that is unless there is a proposal to put a nuclear dump in their constituencies.

Damian Collins MP is gurning about the proposal to put a nuke dump on Romney Marsh, yes it is a bad idea but the dumps have to go somewhere and so far they've tried to palm off the dump onto Labour and Libdem constituencies with the same level of success.

Don't eat the rump if you can't handle the dump.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...sal?CMP=twt_fd

Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone ;-)

The leader of Kent Council is clearly an idiot. Leaving aside the jobs it would create, and the enormous boost to the local economy, his reasons are spurious. To say that Romney marsh is an earthquake zone is no more true than that Caithness is an earthquake zone. And having cycled, driven and walked across Romney Marsh many times, I assure you that it is not any sort of shipping lane...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Little

To say that Romney marsh is an earthquake zone is no more true than that Caithness is an earthquake zone. ...

---

You mean you've never heard of the 1862 Thurso earthquake ?

http://books.google.co.uk/books/abou...AJ&redir_esc=y

Though I agree I wouldn't class Caithness as an earthquake zone..


Rheghead "Don't eat the rump if you can't handle the dump." - Love the quote!

Placing a nuclear waste repository in a marsh, under water, is a very bad idea for the long-term and future generations. They should be placed well inland.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green_not_greed

Placing a nuclear waste repository in a marsh, under water, is a very bad idea for the long-term and future generations. They should be placed well inland.....

---

Explain please

The term marsh is a misnomer where the nuclear facilities are concerned. Dungeness is built on Denge beach which is a very large depositional feature composed of large grade shingle. It's also a cuspitory feature which is being added to all the time and not eroded. It's going nowhere.

i assume that the nuclear dump would be associated with the power station.

Of course it might be more vulnerable to a tsunami....




But there again if we were so concerned with health and safety we would not get out of bed in the morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neilsermk1

Explain please

---

At the design stage for such a facility, a long-term safety case needs to be made, to show that risks (via doses) to future generations will be low enough to be acceptable. The main risk is in leaks into the environment from longer-lived isotopes after their containment fails. Cement plays a large part in keeping things where they were disposed, but the metal waste containers will fail at some point, usually due to ground water ingress and corrosion. Keeping them dry increases their life substantially. So placing a waste repository deliberately where conditions are known to be wet is not good practice. Placing them close to the sea, with the added corrosion from the chloride in sea water, is even worse practice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Little

The leader of Kent Council is clearly an idiot. Leaving aside the jobs it would create, and the enormous boost to the local economy, his reasons are spurious. To say that Romney marsh is an earthquake zone is no more true than that Caithness is an earthquake zone. And having cycled, driven and walked across Romney Marsh many times, I assure you that it is not any sort of shipping lane...

---

And since you moved to Sommerset, you're all for it. [lol]

I would be for it also if they put it at Hinckley Point which is not very far away, since I do not subscribe to folklore fears about nuclear facilities.