biodesiel

10% of all fuel sold at the pumps is now bio diesel, so you are already using it and contributing to the lack of food crops.

Graham

Simple answer to all our woes.

Build a series of nuclear power stations and run every thing using electricty - that way we do away with gas, petrol, diesel coal etc and use oil only for the lubrication of moving parts.

Couldn't agree more. France had the forsight and sense to become more energey independent by building their nuclear stations, while this silly lot in the UK have been running them down. Nuclear fission is much safer than it used to be and I whole heartedly support it, in fact I'd welcome a nuclear power station near me. They can put it on the USAF airbase half a mile from me, in exchange for sending the yanks home and their bloody cowboy F-15 pilots..

Graham

One of the things I find strange against the argument for nuclear is the risk of an accident & the devastation in the surrounding area. But surely if one of the French ones went pop there would be fall out along the south coast, so if we're going to het hit by somebody else's shit we might as well get the benefit from it over here, or am I missing something.

Very unlikely with a modern nuclear power station (although never say never), but an horrific repeat of Chernobyl is something I find hard to imagine with a modern well run site. However, this brings up one thing I have been saying for 30 years. Why don't they build them underground just in case of an accident. Ok, so I know the answer. Cost. But surely it would be a belt and braces approach and worth the extra cost. If Chernobyl had been built underground I would never have measured the radiation from it in my flat in South Croydon over the 6 months after it happened. Just used a dosimeter, but the levels went up to around 30% over background levels for 3 months. Still have the figures written down somewhere.

Graham

================================== Here in the UK some very important person would lose the plans before we got around to building anything. This country has become a breeding ground for incompetence and dithering.

Cic.

[...]

Well, err, I'm not so sure about that...

;-)

Chris

Ahhha - so to put this closer to topic, just as a car with antilock brakes, cornering brake control, electronic stability protection, traction control and active cruise control cannot *possibly* crash?

Other than measuring radiation, you're living in a very sheltered world.

IF there was a way to dispose of the waste products nuclear would be wonderful.

Im not looking for 95/5 i am looking for 70/30 (b30) or 100% (b100)

Why are you looking at all. Are you under some ridiculous notion you are helping the environment?

Graham

I said "never say never", but it is very unlikely with modern design. Would you never EVER build a car, because there is a small chance it might crash due to a design fault?. Anyway, its a ridiculous analogy comparing a car to a nuclear power station.

Or perhaps I am seeing further than you can see and beyond the tabloid view of things.

Graham

Agreed that is a problem. A big one. I hoped we had sorted out nuclear fusion by now so this problem didn't exist, but sadly its taking a while. With half life of 4.7 Million years for U238, its certainly a big responsibility finding somewhere stable enough and deep enough to store it. However, I would forecast that within 500 years we would have the technology to remove it from earth completely without touching it or the risk of using current technology like rockets to get it up there and then safely drop it into the sun. So it may only have to be stored for 300 or so years. I leave the NG to work out the means I am thinking of to take it there as this has gone off topic long enough.

Graham

It's never been particularily likely though.

Not really. Their role hasn't changed: nuclear fission is nuclear fission, getting from A to B is getting from A to B. Both have been demonised by press and politicians. I'm no nuclear scientist, but both should have higher technology solutions to age old problems.

It doesn't seem that way. There are many reasons why nuclear power stations are not built underground and the cost is just one facet.

Why does it matter to you?

My own personal reason for running on biofuel would be cost grounds. Unfortunately, E85's 2p discount to ordinary unleaded is nowhere near enough to make it worth running the Saab on the stuff.

That was a fairly useless answer. Here's a better one:

They recently approved extending the one my dad works at.

Cost saving vs dino diesel. The B100 I buy is miles cheaper than the stuff at the pumps.

Because its a very bad idea. Its more lucrative for farmers to turn their food crop fields over to crops for bio fuels and making food scarce or expensive in third world countries.

Graham