• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Energy price rises and price cap discussion.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,002
Aha interesting! That would have been around two years before I started to become familiar with this sort of thing. If I remember I met ferret out some old resources and have a poke and see when the thresholds did change. In any event, at least its not quite as long ago as I thought. Still quite a while though.

Quotes the £16,000 figure, so my error. It's my age you know. :lol: The figure was £12,000 at some point though. My view was based on unemployment benefit (and it's many names over the years) rather than housing benefit. They may have been out of sync at some point.

1995 Hansard extract gives a date of April 1990 as when the upper limit was increased to £16,000 for Housing Benefit. At the time the lower limit was set at £3,000 (set in April 1988). The amounts varied for different benefits.

I shall not derail the thread further.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,493
What we should be doing is:
1. Funding 100% of the cost of the insulation of ALL properties up to a rating of at least C, ideally better, and mandating all rental properties, both social and private, to be improved to B or A within 12 months or before any new tenant rental contract is signed, whichever comes first. That way you need less energy in the first place. DIY installation should be included in this funding as some will find it preferable to go that way, and the Building Regs part of it eased. Funding from general taxation; increase if necessary.
My house is a prefab shed, the top half is made of steel on the outside. I have no idea what, if any, insulation it has but the temperature will drop from 20 degrees to 14 degrees in a few hours on a cold night. I'm not even sure what insulation options exist for houses like mine. I suspect I'll be wearing a fleece and sitting under a blanket this winter. I could afford the higher prices but I'm not going to hand over all my disposable income to British Gas.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
I'm not even sure what insulation options exist for houses like mine. I suspect I'll be wearing a fleece and sitting under a blanket this winter.
Sounds like you'd need new internal walls with foam insulation between them and the external walls as I assume external cladding wouldn't be an option aesthetically.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,534
Location
Redcar

TPO

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2018
Messages
346
Welcome to the net zero future. What the generally well off proponents of net zero don't tell you is that if they get their way, this will be the new normal. Just wait until they try to replace gas central heating boilers with the lowest-cost air source heat pumps.....

There's a solution tho. Start with scrapping the green levy and VAT on fuel for home heating. Then, all those who are committed to net zero can be put on a smart meter and a proper "green" tariff and then cut off to balance the grid shortfall every time the level of wind and solar drops, that should incentivise them to insulate their homes as well as being a lesson in how energy infrastructure actually works in the current real world ( I.e. those on "green" tariffs only have uninterrupted supply due to gas fired and nuclear). Then we can push modular nuclear and get fracking, conditional on local people/UK getting priority of supply and extraction cost plus a small profit.

Under this scheme, every customer would be given the choice of electricity source once a year, from fracked gas and nuclear or wholly from genuinely renewable sources. All politicians espousing net zero would automatically be mandated onto the proper green tariff. (So, no quickly swapping tariff when a calm cloudy winter blocking high is forecast......)

After a couple of years including at least one colder winter we should be able to have the sort of sensible conversation about future energy without the most vulnerable paying the price for someone else's "virtuous" decision.

It's not dissimilar with electric cars. There's not enough rare earth elements for the so called green energy revolution, with current policy trajectory what will actually happen is that unless you are rich you won't travel much and probably won't be able to heat all of your home.

A push for nuclear (including reactors that burn the thorium waste from refining those rare earths needed for wind turbines) and fracking for a stable domestic source of gas to tide us over until more nuclear comes on line is probably best practical solution. Build tidal systems too.

Ironically the govt spent a fortune and wrecked the economy to protect older people from COVID but now they and other commentators seem happy to let those same people die of cold. What a rum do!

TPO
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,002
Welcome to the net zero future. What the generally well off proponents of net zero don't tell you is that if they get their way, this will be the new normal. Just wait until they try to replace gas central heating boilers with the lowest-cost air source heat pumps.....

There's a solution tho. Start with scrapping the green levy and VAT on fuel for home heating. Then, all those who are committed to net zero can be put on a smart meter and a proper "green" tariff and then cut off to balance the grid shortfall every time the level of wind and solar drops, that should incentivise them to insulate their homes as well as being a lesson in how energy infrastructure actually works in the current real world ( I.e. those on "green" tariffs only have uninterrupted supply due to gas fired and nuclear). Then we can push modular nuclear and get fracking, conditional on local people/UK getting priority of supply and extraction cost plus a small profit.

Under this scheme, every customer would be given the choice of electricity source once a year, from fracked gas and nuclear or wholly from genuinely renewable sources. All politicians espousing net zero would automatically be mandated onto the proper green tariff. (So, no quickly swapping tariff when a calm cloudy winter blocking high is forecast......)

After a couple of years including at least one colder winter we should be able to have the sort of sensible conversation about future energy without the most vulnerable paying the price for someone else's "virtuous" decision.

It's not dissimilar with electric cars. There's not enough rare earth elements for the so called green energy revolution, with current policy trajectory what will actually happen is that unless you are rich you won't travel much and probably won't be able to heat all of your home.

A push for nuclear (including reactors that burn the thorium waste from refining those rare earths needed for wind turbines) and fracking for a stable domestic source of gas to tide us over until more nuclear comes on line is probably best practical solution. Build tidal systems too.

Ironically the govt spent a fortune and wrecked the economy to protect older people from COVID but now they and other commentators seem happy to let those same people die of cold. What a rum do!

TPO
The more likely answer, as seen in many countries around the world with unstable power supply, and used by members of the Gypsy and Traveller Community here in the UK, is that everyone who is able buys a personal portable diesel generator. Throbbing day and night as required, pushing out noxious fumes. Buy now while stocks last and prices are reasonable.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
Welcome to the net zero future. What the generally well off proponents of net zero don't tell you is that if they get their way, this will be the new normal. Just wait until they try to replace gas central heating boilers with the lowest-cost air source heat pumps.
On the contrary - there's zero reason why burning stuff that's dug out of the ground should be more efficient or cheaper than tapping into the 3.85 million exajoules of solar energy that hits the Earth annually.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Indeed and the benefits system in general! I was dealing with someone today who was shocked to discover that as someone aged 30 in a private rented property the Government would only pay them a "shared accommodation" rate rather than that for a one bedroom property (applies until they reach 35 with a few specific exceptions). In your case I hope/assume that you have some other income either yourself or with a partner as otherwise get yourself a Pension Credit claim in!!
I'm okay(ish) thanks as I am now receiving the benefits of my late wife's private pension at widower's rate, but how things will pan out if we have a cold autumn/winter is another matter, in an eighteen century property without central heating or gas. I do need to move, but it can't be done quickly.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
On the contrary - there's zero reason why burning stuff that's dug out of the ground should be more efficient or cheaper than tapping into the 3.85 million exajoules of solar energy that hits the Earth annually.

And heat pumps are a bit of a distraction. Insulate, insulate, insulate, including heat recovery ventilation. Once done, all you'll need is a couple of 500W panel heaters on for an hour or two a day to keep you toasty all winter.
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,493
Welcome to the net zero future. What the generally well off proponents of net zero don't tell you is that if they get their way, this will be the new normal. Just wait until they try to replace gas central heating boilers with the lowest-cost air source heat pumps.....
Meanwhile some countries such as China continue to burn coal like there's no tomorrow. Pi$$ing in the wind springs to mind.

The more likely answer, as seen in many countries around the world with unstable power supply, and used by members of the Gypsy and Traveller Community here in the UK, is that everyone who is able buys a personal portable diesel generator. Throbbing day and night as required, pushing out noxious fumes. Buy now while stocks last and prices are reasonable.
Maybe I should attach my bike to a generator. Then I can generate some power and keep warm at the same time. Win win! I'm joking, before someone starts listing the reasons why it won't work.
 

TPO

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2018
Messages
346
Source for that specific statement, please.
It's my opinion based on my observation of what govt has been up the past couple of years.

Your views may differ. Last time I looked, that was OK (in the UK).

And remember, a source is just someone else's thinking. With politics and indeed many social-political issues, I prefer to do my own thinking than be told what to think. But I recognise that for some people they get comfort from being told what to think as with the COVID hysteria in certain parts of the media. Each to their own.

On the contrary - there's zero reason why burning stuff that's dug out of the ground should be more efficient or cheaper than tapping into the 3.85 million exajoules of solar energy that hits the Earth annually.

It's the difference between a goal and a realistic plan to achieve that goal.

A person may have a goal to be fit, thin and climb mountains but if they sit on the sofa eating junk food and watching TV they probably won't achieve that goal no matter how much they talk about it.

Problem is that most politicians and indeed one might even say most neurotypicals confuse the end goal with a realistic plan to get there. Often to the point of believing that if they talk about the goal incessantly and make the odd token effort, it will happen.

Eventually though, that incessant reiteration of belief/goal runs up against hard real life. If the grid falls over in the winter because we cannot get enough gas, ask yourself why it is with the publicity and statements about net zero we are still so far away from not needing gas. Clue: it's about politics and hypersocial persons confusing goals with plans, not about engineering.

You need certain chemical elements to make solar panels, I encourage you to find out how they are mined and refined. Wind turbines need rare earth magnets to have a non gearbox generator system. Again I encourage you to learn about the process of rare earth extraction and refining and what it leaves behind. Ditto lithium batteries and touch screens. Green is not that clean for those extracting and refining them, the elements are plentiful but extraction is difficult, here we run up against the laws of chemistry- not opinion.

Solar energy conversion to useful amount of electricity in UK is limited away from the South in the summer. I am really interested in doing stuff with solar, batteries of various types, little turbines and stuff, indeed I have an advanced solar array on my camper van, hours of fun specifying and building a highly efficient 12V system and learning a whole lot about solar power realities as I did so. You have to change the whole philosophy around energy use.

Top and bottom of it is, in terms of the science and engineering involved in energy capture/conversion, there's no such thing as a free lunch (ref: the laws of thermodynamics) and fossil fuels are a remarkably concentrated energy source compared with most others. The switch to alternatives is difficult and less will be available. To ensure equitable access needs considerable planning which will drastically change society to be effective. That requires much more truth than the platitudes we have had from politicians and commentators from all of the political spectrum.

Given the rate of burn of fossil fuels by the likes of China, India (and even Germany who replaced nuclear with lignite coal extracted by strip mining the forest), my preference is for a planned and engineered transition where ones ability to have a reasonably warm house in winter is not left to the chance of ones wealth level. But your opinion may differ.

And heat pumps are a bit of a distraction. Insulate, insulate, insulate, including heat recovery ventilation. Once done, all you'll need is a couple of 500W panel heaters on for an hour or two a day to keep you toasty all winter.
Earth sheltered housing?

If I ever get a big enough garden I'd like to try plans for an earth sheltered greenhouse. (In my dreams, an earth sheltered house.....)

Shutters, every home should have them.

I could go on.......

TPO
 
Last edited:

alxndr

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2015
Messages
1,467
My house is a prefab shed, the top half is made of steel on the outside. I have no idea what, if any, insulation it has but the temperature will drop from 20 degrees to 14 degrees in a few hours on a cold night. I'm not even sure what insulation options exist for houses like mine. I suspect I'll be wearing a fleece and sitting under a blanket this winter. I could afford the higher prices but I'm not going to hand over all my disposable income to British Gas.
Is it a BISF constructed house? These can take External Wall Insulation (EWI). It doesn't look particularly unpleasant either and makes the house look more traditionally constructed. For an example, have a look up and down this street which was left with a mixture of houses with EWI and without after the Local Authority insulated the properties they still own:

I have no idea on the costs involved though (not my industry, just recently developed a non-traditional construction interest), and you would need to check there's no corrosion to the steel frame before covering it. I'd suggest being careful with how cold you run your house as you really don't want damp gathering around the steel frame and causing rust. Similarly internal wall insulation is more problematic on that type of property as it tends to lead to condensation on the external side of it.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,266
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
It's my opinion based on my observation of what govt has been up the past couple of years. Your views may differ. Last time I looked, that was OK (in the UK).

And remember, a source is just someone else's thinking. With politics and indeed many social-political issues, I prefer to do my own thinking than be told what to think. But I recognise that for some people they get comfort from being told what to think as with the COVID hysteria in certain parts of the media. Each to their own.
What annoyed me was that you had been quoting what was said as a proven fact, not just an opinion based upon your personal observations, in which case you could have added a rider stating that.

I assure you that what you state in your second paragraph about "people getting comfort from being told what to think" does most certainly not apply to me, despite the introduction of that statement by you as a veiled insult to me, but I am far too old and wise-headed to be offended by such matters.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
There's an unfortunate truth that most of our renewable technologies are imported. As an example, there has been a great investment in solar by the UK gmnt this year, however costs have gone up due to supply chain issues from the main supplier.

We need some domestic factories churning out this stuff using raw materials from reliable countries
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
There's an unfortunate truth that most of our renewable technologies are imported. As an example, there has been a great investment in solar by the UK gmnt this year, however costs have gone up due to supply chain issues from the main supplier.

We need some domestic factories churning out this stuff using raw materials from reliable countries

We generally need more domestic industry again. Wasn't that part of the alleged idea of Brexit? We really do need to look to the likes of Germany for what our economy should look more like.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
We generally need more domestic industry again. Wasn't that part of the alleged idea of Brexit? We really do need to look to the likes of Germany for what our economy should look more like.

I believe it was quoted as such.

Frankly it needs to be encouraged, anyway.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
You need certain chemical elements to make solar panels, I encourage you to find out how they are mined and refined. Wind turbines need rare earth magnets to have a non gearbox generator system. Again I encourage you to learn about the process of rare earth extraction and refining and what it leaves behind. Ditto lithium batteries and touch screens. Green is not that clean for those extracting and refining them, the elements are plentiful but extraction is difficult, here we run up against the laws of chemistry- not opinion.
Yes, alternative energy sources require a lot of resources to produce - but so do petrochemicals (I suggest you take a look at what's left behind when you strip-mine coal or when a oil/gas well finishes production). The difference is that when you mine rare earth metals to make a wind turbine's magnets that environmental impact is spread out over the 20+ year lifetime of the turbine, but fossil fuels can only be burned once.
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,493
Is it a BISF constructed house? These can take External Wall Insulation (EWI). It doesn't look particularly unpleasant either and makes the house look more traditionally constructed. For an example, have a look up and down this street which was left with a mixture of houses with EWI and without after the Local Authority insulated the properties they still own:

I have no idea on the costs involved though (not my industry, just recently developed a non-traditional construction interest), and you would need to check there's no corrosion to the steel frame before covering it. I'd suggest being careful with how cold you run your house as you really don't want damp gathering around the steel frame and causing rust. Similarly internal wall insulation is more problematic on that type of property as it tends to lead to condensation on the external side of it.
Yes spot on. that's what it looks like. I'll do some research about insulation options.
 

Wilts Wanderer

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2016
Messages
2,462
Have you got a source for that?

That is a widely accepted fact, that increased demand for rare elements for battery components etc are far outstripping supply/reserve of these materials. There are growing calls for a comprehensive recycling industry as a lot of this stuff just ends up in landfill due to the ‘throwaway tech’ culture that we currently seem to have. (Apple, I’m looking at you!)

Edit: here’s a helpful article that I dug up with a simple Google search.
 
Last edited:

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
That is a widely accepted fact, that increased demand for rare elements for battery components etc are far outstripping supply/reserve of these materials.
I find that surprising. Despite the name, "rare Earth" metals are hardly rare - most of them are considerably more common than other commodity metals. For example, Neodymium as used in magnets has an abundance of 41.5ppm, compared to gold (0.005ppm), silver (0.008ppm) and tin (2ppm).,
 

TPO

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2018
Messages
346
Yes, alternative energy sources require a lot of resources to produce - but so do petrochemicals (I suggest you take a look at what's left behind when you strip-mine coal or when a oil/gas well finishes production). The difference is that when you mine rare earth metals to make a wind turbine's magnets that environmental impact is spread out over the 20+ year lifetime of the turbine, but fossil fuels can only be burned once.

You are correct in the impact of some fossil fuel mining- the way that Germany stripped old growth forest to get filthy lignite coal to burn (so they could stop using safe nuclear) for example. Utterly bonkers but supported by the German Green Party. On the other hand, North Sea gas extraction as carried out by Norway and UK has been generally low impact and I doubt most people even notice the existence of the oil/gas extraction wells in the south of England.

Equally, a wind turbine will also leave some pollution behind, we currently cannot recycle the composite blades for example, and there's a lot of concrete required for the base (energy, limestone required to make cement plus sand and aggregate). There's also the cost of the materials to build it (aside from the turbine assembly which uses a lot of rare earth magnets because that allows a design without gearbox which is more efficient and less prone to failure).

Plus with wind turbines you still need a back-up power source to maintain grid stability when the wind isn't in the generation speed range. Which means you need all those gas-fired stations available. So, if you want to lose the back-up gas turbines you need an interruptible supply, i.e. certain users only get lekky when the wind is right. To promote education in this I believe we need consumers on SmartMeters (which can cut people off and ration lekky) but go it on basis of "if you want a renewable tariff, fine- but you can be cut off when we run out of renewables." (Yes, there are some grid batteries going in but these have limited capacity).

At which point maybe we'd get some sensible alternative power investment such as into nuclear and tidal which are predictable and reliable. Also some real focus on energy saving.... which also links to stuff like property ownership...... and again, lifestyle choices to be made.

Similarly, if we add a lot of electric cars into the grid it gets interesting......... wonder how many folks would like to come out to a depleted car battery in the morning because it was used to balance the grid overnight?

If we need a stop-gap- and I suggest that energy use patterns indicate we do need one if the lights/heating are to stay on- then IMO it's least-worst short-term option to extract what we need from our own reserves in a controlled manner as opposed to (for example) importing energy (or gas or oil) from a country that makes it by burning strip-mined lignite. Similarly, if the old nuclear fast-breeder technology was dusted off there's potential to burn the plutonium waste stored at Sellafield and kill two birds with one stone- render old nuclear waste less harmful and extract energy whilst we do so.

Eventually, fossil fuel will need to become more costly to discourage profligacy, but first we should make it possible for all people to be frugal with small changes. Insulate roofs, walls and have shutters on windows (warm in winter, cooler in summer). Perhaps a "right to buy land and build" so long as your build was an energy efficient earth-sheltered house with minimal grid use and water-harvesting. (I'd also get rid of street lighting, but then I grew up in a dark rural place and like the dark.)

That is a widely accepted fact, that increased demand for rare elements for battery components etc are far outstripping supply/reserve of these materials. There are growing calls for a comprehensive recycling industry as a lot of this stuff just ends up in landfill due to the ‘throwaway tech’ culture that we currently seem to have. (Apple, I’m looking at you!)

Edit: here’s a helpful article that I dug up with a simple Google search.

Indeed.

This: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Rare-Metals-War-digital-technologies-ebook/dp/B085RMQNLC/ref=sr_1_3?crid=E1BJ378UBDI5&keywords=rare+earth+metals&qid=1660134212&s=books&sprefix=rare+earth,stripbooks,60&sr=1-3 is really quite an interesting read, as is this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Elements-P...watch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1660134691&sr=8-28

Hopefully these tomes will provide a good starter for those who always ask for references. (They also contain good references within them)

Wonder how many people realise that radioactive thorium is a waste product of refining some rare earths? Of that the cobalt required for batteries has the main source a war zone in the Congo where it's dug out by hand by children? Lithium has its own challenges as @Wilts Wanderer notes. [As do other "consumables-" and things such as fast fashion which is really inexcusable]

We don't see anything in the news about rare earths as journalists who stick their noses into things the Chinese govt doesn't want them to don't have a very good survival rate. Plus the average journo is an arts graduate who probably hasn't got much idea what a rare earth element is and has a poor understanding of the scale of modern infrastructure and supply chains. And even if they did know, how many listeners/viewers/readers would be interested? Always easier to mouth platitudes than learn/do something difficult or which causes us discomfort from cognitive dissonance or in other ways- that's part of the human condition. (Which, in my original analogy, is why many people say they want to be fit and climb mountains but very few do the difficult things required to be able to).

If you're serious about zero carbon and understand all this and are seriously working towards using less energy (directly or embedded in objects or even food) and are happy to be on a genuinely green interruptible electricity supply and pay high energy prices- fair enough, good for you, I truly respect those who put their money where their mouth is. BUT- if not, please think about plans vs goals, and instead of talking about goals, start to have a good look at the underpinning science and engineering (that's an understanding of basic principles I mean, not just picking articles you agree with the most) so you can contribute usefully to the conversation about proper plans for how we de-carbonise. And if you have an ounce of fairness, think about how we can do this without hurting the most vulnerable in our society.

This is all doable technologically, but unless a reasonable proportion of the population start understanding the underlying issues with the various means of achieving the de-carbonisation goals, I fear it will in the end come down to market forces manipulated by those who stand to gain from the situation.

TPO
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,543
Location
Elginshire
To promote education in this I believe we need consumers on SmartMeters (which can cut people off and ration lekky) but go it on basis of "if you want a renewable tariff, fine- but you can be cut off when we run out of renewables." (Yes, there are some grid batteries going in but these have limited capacity).
I find this bit rather baffling. I've been on "green" tariffs since I took over the electricity account here, yet I'm still subject to increases in prices in line with those of wholesale gas. The tariff I was on this time last year had me spending about £45 a month (it was a too-good-to-be-true offer, to be fair - they went bust) and I'm now paying £100 a month on a so-called 100% renewable tariff. The idea that I should be cut off because there's no current renewable supply is ridiculous, quite frankly.

It's very warm, sunny and breezy today - perhaps I should be getting my energy for free, going by the same logic?
 

joebassman

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2020
Messages
164
Location
Stowupland
As far as Nuclear power stations, is there not the issue of what to do with the waste?

Are they that safe?

According this article there is among children aged 5 who live within 5km of a station a 61% increase in all forms of cancer and a 119% excess risk of leukemia. Another study says there is a 23% higher incidence of leukemia among children aged 0-9 who live within 16km of a station.

 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
As far as Nuclear power stations, is there not the issue of what to do with the waste?

Are they that safe?

According this article there is among children aged 5 who live within 5km of a station a 61% increase in all forms of cancer and a 119% excess risk of leukemia. Another study says there is a 23% higher incidence of leukemia among children aged 0-9 who live within 16km of a station.

Long term on site storage is pretty much as safe as it gets. Most waste is kept in a very stable long term form where it won't leak. Also nearly all waste could be reprocessed into new fuel, it's simply a matter of this being mandated.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,628
As far as Nuclear power stations, is there not the issue of what to do with the waste?
Dig a big hole and put it in the hole.

The problem is the government wants a community to volunteer to host the hole with no real compensation, so nothing happens for decades.
The nuclear industry, unlike the fossil fuel industries or almost all other industries, knows where the bulk of its waste is.

Are they that safe?

According this article there is among children aged 5 who live within 5km of a station a 61% increase in all forms of cancer and a 119% excess risk of leukemia. Another study says there is a 23% higher incidence of leukemia among children aged 0-9 who live within 16km of a station.


Leaving aside the issues of finding additional cancers becuase you are looking for them, there are very few people in the UK who live within 5km of a nuclear facility.
Even in the US, look at the size of those error bars!

EDIT:

That study is talking about the extreme difficulty of measuring this stuff and how basically none of these studies even attempt to show causality!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top