#infoAnarchy last cranked 2007-05-30 23:57

facial_table.avi || http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11162052/ || http://schmaltz.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/miriamgonzalez009.jpg >> Always tast better when someoneelse cooks your meal! || hand in your ticket and go watch the geek

China to fast breed reactors, multiplying existing capacity x20
posted by miketv at 2007-05-30 11:09

miketv: more
miketv: 150 or more nuclear reactors
miketv: and worldwide energy consumption to grow by 60%
miketv: China would add about 2 reactors a year if meeting targets set now
miketv: Where's the WMDs now, George?
miketv: "nuclear boom would make China the world's biggest nuclear power nation"
miketv: you heard it here.
miketv: "300 nuclear plants operating by 2050".
miketv: pending confirmation that there _is_ a frigging 2050.
miketv: "Last year, China reached an agreement with the Australian government to procure uranium on the condition that it would not use the nuclear material for military purposes."
miketv: assumes there is some way to dissociate "nuclear material" from "military purposes". hahaha. good luck trying that one on, Mr Australian Govt.
miketv: hahaha.
miketv: <south korea/pakistan/vietnam/australia/samoa/us/fucking anyone> oh yeah, i see your non-military nuclear power stations china, doesn't make me edgy at all
miketv: <everyone else> nods
miketv: see if you can guess the USA's response to this in the coming 3 years
miketv: hahaha. goodby nuclear non-proliferation treaty, thankyou mr fucking howard.
miketv: Most Britons Want International Deal Banning All Nuclear Weapons
miketv: strangely, this story seems to have almost zero coverage .. it's legit, I saw one par on the Melbourne Age, but those two backwoods links are all I could find ... odd? ce la vie
miketv: good for the goose, good for the gander: how can anyone ask China not to have 5 times as many nukes as the USA, since they do have five times the population.
miketv: and there's really no alternative, right, mr english-speaking governments, I mean we all _know_ solar isn't _really_ an option, huh? or ... ?
miketv: Australia's recent "report" on nuclear power is opposed by one of the members on the panel who were supposed to write it (who? The Chief Scientist of Australia.) That didn't get much coverage either.
miketv: he thought the Government report was a little biased .. well it was written by a guy who was the head of the government's nuclear business, so who wouldn't? of course, that wasn't widely covered either, we all know him as the ex-head of a telecom company
miketv: can't even find the supposed 5-page "review" which critiques the 150-page report, only an interview
miketv: and a critique from some other people
miketv: drifted off-topic? I'm not so sure, the timing and the statements seem .. eery .. and I doubt China could make such an announcement if Australia had not given the nod to supply the uranium .. which would be beyond the current capacity, but even the left-wing party contemplates opening up for business like a nuclear brothel.
miketv: IMHO no way can even china roll out 150 nukes, and no way can .au roll out 25, in the near future (without major incidents) .. both have overstated the number in order to put the populacce on the backfoot and drum up business .. shonky.
miketv: GET IT HERE.
miketv: oh. and ffs now after making his report about how supposedly great nukes are, Switkowski has been apointed BACK to ANSTO chief again.
miketv: WHERE ARE YOUR INDEPENDENT EXPERTS NOW???

#infoAnarchy Chump Archives for 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007