Sellafield leak a damning indictment, says Minister (UK)

[struggle4progress]

<snip> "The pattern with Sellafield is well established and consistent," the Environment Minister said.

"A serious incident occurs, the investigation reveals serious safety failures and weaknesses, recommendations are drawn up and implemented, and further assurances given that the plant is safe.

"However, this pattern is untenable and the safety record at the plant has given the Irish Government serious cause for concern for some time.

"This latest information serves only to increase the concerns of the Government and to reinforce our efforts to secure the safe and orderly closure of Sellafield," the minister said. <snip>

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&scoring=d&q=radioactivity&btnG=Search+News

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[struggle4progress]

3. "What is clear is firstly the crack should never have occurred, and ..

and secondly if it did occur and when it occurred, no matter how small or big it was, it should have been immediately detected," Mr Roche said. "To say this went on for five months, and possibly from last August, does nothing to give us any confidence and re-emphasises our determination to press ahead with the legal actions we have in place" ...
http://www.online.ie/news/viewer.adp?article=3239941

[Massacure]

4. Thank you captain obvious.

Of course we all know heads need to roll over this. But don't try to take the an entire industry down over one incident, especially when the alternative is much worse.

[NNadir]

5. Went on for 5 months? No one noticed all the dead?

Or is the case that nobody was injured?

Maybe this "extremely dangerous" situation depends on the definition of "extremely dangerous." If it scares the pants off of the illiterate upper middle class spoiled brats comprising Greenpeace, it's "extremely dangerous."

If it's something that actually kills people - and they're only poor people - you know something like famine, air pollution, submersion of whole countries, extreme weather, well then its not dangerous. How could something be dangerous if it fails to divert the vacant, stoned stares of the rich upper middle class illiterate spoiled brats chanting about a leaky pipe.

In fact the pipe was so trivial that no one noticed for five fucking months. I don't know if this gets into minds too weak to hold much water, but this was not Bhopal. It wasn't even the refinery explosion in Texas a few months ago.

Now here's something that's been in the news about risks to Britain, the shut down of the gulf stream:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1602579,00.html

"Britain faces big chill as ocean current slows

by Jonathan Leake, Science Editor



CLIMATE change researchers have detected the first signs of a slowdown in the Gulf Stream — the mighty ocean current that keeps Britain and Europe from freezing.

They have found that one of the “engines” driving the Gulf Stream — the sinking of supercooled water in the Greenland Sea — has weakened to less than a quarter of its former strength.



The weakening, apparently caused by global warming, could herald big changes in the current over the next few years or decades. Paradoxically, it could lead to Britain and northwestern and Europe undergoing a sharp drop in temperatures.

Such a change has long been predicted..."

And the Greenpeace solution to this crisis is...

(Leonardo DiCaprio opens the envelope)... 25% of our electricity from PV cells in...

...2040!

http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/solutions/renewables/solar.html

But wait...they can't decide if it's 25% of the electricity or 25% of the energy:

http://archive.greenpeace.org/pressreleases/climate/2001oct17.html

It really doesn't matter, because this tripe is not much different when they said, back in the 1970's, that 25% of the energy or electricity or whatever would be solar by 2000.

When you ask them, they can't produce a single planned plant on even 1/10th that scale. In fact they have nothing but empty promises to address global climate change.

Let's repeat that: Nothing.

Action for them is going to a sexy protest and then driving in their cars to a bar for a round of happy horse shit and drinking afterward. They have no plans, no insight, and nothing to build, only little whinings about the minor setbacks of those who do have plans, insights and the task of building and doing.

But we don't give a fuck about global climate change, do we, at Greenpeace? Let's all look at the leaky pipe. The spoiled children are scared by it.

[struggle4progress]

6. Is it really be too difficult for you to stay near the topic of the post?

This article essentially contains quotations from a government Minister in the UK regarding the Sellafield reprocessing plant.

Despite all your off-topic noise in your various posts above, the Minister makes reference neither to tritiated fish or trees, nor to Chernobyl, nor to Greenpeace. And in keeping with your usual practice, you argue with assertions not made in the article, using bogus "quotations" designed to create (false) impressions you are arguing with something someone has actually said. As usual, you mainly provide hostile rhetoric, without much regard for the niceties of syllogism.

One nasty rant leads unsurprisingly to another: while I am personally sympathetic to your view of the medicinal inefficacy of chanting the rosary, for example, there seems no real point to mentioning the rosary at all except (of course) that it enables you to air your anti-Catholic biases. How tiresome this all becomes!

[struggle4progress]

2. Corrected link:

http://www.online.ie/news/viewer.adp?article=3239941