This is a case of how a headline can seem more alarmist than the content of the article, becasue when you read you find that there are still this issues to be addressed:
"� 'How might new stations be financed?
� What kind of government support might be necessary for new build to take place?
� How far would new build be consistent with our market framework for energy?
� How best to secure public acceptance?
� How far would we need to resolve the long outstanding issue of finding a final depository for high level nuclear waste, as a pre-condition for progressing new build?'"
So not really 'plans' then, eh? More like discussions; nothing new there then. What's the purpose of this report? I can't decide whether it's to soften us up to accept Nuke power refurb and new build or to try to galvanise oposition ...
The Observer | Business | Secret papers reveal new nuclear building plan:
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"
I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...
-
I've been watching the TV series 'Foundation'. I read the books about 50 years ago (I know!) but scarcely now remember anything...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
No comments:
Post a Comment