Wrong decision. Ideological knee jerk nonsense rather than doing what’s best for the country.
We need more nuclear power. Sooner rather than later.
Can elected officials pick up a science textbook and actually read what nuclear power is?
Not every reactor is going to be a Chernobyl. It’s incredibly safe and produces massive amounts of energy, and no fossil fuel wastage.
I’m sick of all this anti nuclear crap
Right decision. If we could have nuclear power tomorrow then perhaps, but the process is convoluted, drawn-out, generally universally opposed by anyone living near a proposed one, expensive and centralised. Green energy offers much faster roll out and retains the option for local democracy and ownership of assets/reduction in household bills.
It shouldn’t be either/or.
Renewables with nuclear as the baseload is the ideal.
We’ve been meeting our energy needs for years with renewables so this makes total sense. Nuclear is great, but there’s just no demand for it here and it would be a ridiculous expense. Expanding the existing renewable infrastructure makes more financial sense.
We need both
Ideologues.
Tom Greatrex, quoted as an expert as the CEO of the Nuclear Industry Association, was a Labour MP until 2015 for Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
IIRC Jim Murphy, former MP for East Ren until 2015, has been lobbying hard recently on behalf of big energy companies.
Seems like the Scottish Labour all-star alumni team are out in force lobbying for nuclear and against whatever the Scottish Government are doing atm.
Does nuclear not count as renewable? It’s as renewable as solar, it’s the same bloody thing.
Just get my feckin bills lowered
Energy is a reserved matter. It doesn’t matter a flying buttress what the SNP, Scottish Labour or Reformed Dogs Jobbies want to do, it’s reserved to Westminster.
As a Scottish resident it is hilarious each time this comes up.
The same people who cheer when Scotland periodically runs itself on renewable energy alone seem to be the same people who moan when a new windfarm gets planned/permission to be built nearby.
Now there is the new trunk powerline cutting through many communities (search monster pylons) seemingly to sell ‘our’ power to other nations.
What fun!
I just wish we’d get some of the cool pylons that look like walking Giants.
Maybe do both?
There are prime nuclear sites in Scotland plus massive opportunities for small modular reactors around the energy intensive industries & military production along the Clyde. Thousands of jobs & growth are at stake.
Rightly or wrongly, the SNP are potentially turning their back on massive investment from Westminster here. Personally I think it makes no sense whatsoever
Scotland produced 113% of the power it required through renewable energy last year, if I have understood what I’ve read. I suspect what they mean is they don’t see the point in using money for nuclear power right now as they don’t feel they need to.
Reliable nuclear for data centers and govt facilities
Renewables for the commoners
This is the best balance
The anti-nuclear retardation of the SNP is the main thing driving me away from them…, what the fuck are they smoking
Just remind us how much the current UK govts guaranteed price per megawatt hour is compared to that of wind price at the last auction) Nov 2024 I think it was.
Let’s start there.
We need more interconnectors so we can export more energy and import it when needed. Nuclear is good power but it should be built in the south as the economics is setup to make that most profitable.
Why either or? These two are the solution!
If its so few barrels and such little harm, then why are the uk government too afraid to recover the leaking barrels tossed over the sides of ships in the 1970’s and 80’s.. some even made it into that sea trench.
Surely “a few kilograms” shouldn’t therefore necessitate many barrels dumped, nor the ongoing grind to find a part of the country happy to store nuclear waste still awaiting disposal via long term storage!?
Makes sense because of the lower density, and beside if there’s a bad situation like no wind, so sunshine, you can just have a few power lines from England.
Scotland can get away with that as it has lots of natural, renewable resources for the population. England doesn’t have the same options due to the vastly larger population and energy usage and less space per person for renewables.
It makes sense. Nuclear is absolutely a great long term investment for a solid baseline. And what I am seeing from down south doesn’t look like it’s doing that, rather leaping on the nuclear train because it’s popular with voters.
That’s a very bad way to aproach something as long term as nuclear power stations.
24 comments
Wrong decision. Ideological knee jerk nonsense rather than doing what’s best for the country.
We need more nuclear power. Sooner rather than later.
Can elected officials pick up a science textbook and actually read what nuclear power is?
Not every reactor is going to be a Chernobyl. It’s incredibly safe and produces massive amounts of energy, and no fossil fuel wastage.
I’m sick of all this anti nuclear crap
Right decision. If we could have nuclear power tomorrow then perhaps, but the process is convoluted, drawn-out, generally universally opposed by anyone living near a proposed one, expensive and centralised. Green energy offers much faster roll out and retains the option for local democracy and ownership of assets/reduction in household bills.
It shouldn’t be either/or.
Renewables with nuclear as the baseload is the ideal.
We’ve been meeting our energy needs for years with renewables so this makes total sense. Nuclear is great, but there’s just no demand for it here and it would be a ridiculous expense. Expanding the existing renewable infrastructure makes more financial sense.
We need both
Ideologues.
Tom Greatrex, quoted as an expert as the CEO of the Nuclear Industry Association, was a Labour MP until 2015 for Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
IIRC Jim Murphy, former MP for East Ren until 2015, has been lobbying hard recently on behalf of big energy companies.
Seems like the Scottish Labour all-star alumni team are out in force lobbying for nuclear and against whatever the Scottish Government are doing atm.
Does nuclear not count as renewable? It’s as renewable as solar, it’s the same bloody thing.
Just get my feckin bills lowered
Energy is a reserved matter. It doesn’t matter a flying buttress what the SNP, Scottish Labour or Reformed Dogs Jobbies want to do, it’s reserved to Westminster.
As a Scottish resident it is hilarious each time this comes up.
The same people who cheer when Scotland periodically runs itself on renewable energy alone seem to be the same people who moan when a new windfarm gets planned/permission to be built nearby.
Now there is the new trunk powerline cutting through many communities (search monster pylons) seemingly to sell ‘our’ power to other nations.
What fun!
I just wish we’d get some of the cool pylons that look like walking Giants.
Maybe do both?
There are prime nuclear sites in Scotland plus massive opportunities for small modular reactors around the energy intensive industries & military production along the Clyde. Thousands of jobs & growth are at stake.
Rightly or wrongly, the SNP are potentially turning their back on massive investment from Westminster here. Personally I think it makes no sense whatsoever
Scotland produced 113% of the power it required through renewable energy last year, if I have understood what I’ve read. I suspect what they mean is they don’t see the point in using money for nuclear power right now as they don’t feel they need to.
Reliable nuclear for data centers and govt facilities
Renewables for the commoners
This is the best balance
The anti-nuclear retardation of the SNP is the main thing driving me away from them…, what the fuck are they smoking
Just remind us how much the current UK govts guaranteed price per megawatt hour is compared to that of wind price at the last auction) Nov 2024 I think it was.
Let’s start there.
We need more interconnectors so we can export more energy and import it when needed. Nuclear is good power but it should be built in the south as the economics is setup to make that most profitable.
Why either or? These two are the solution!
If its so few barrels and such little harm, then why are the uk government too afraid to recover the leaking barrels tossed over the sides of ships in the 1970’s and 80’s.. some even made it into that sea trench.
Surely “a few kilograms” shouldn’t therefore necessitate many barrels dumped, nor the ongoing grind to find a part of the country happy to store nuclear waste still awaiting disposal via long term storage!?
Makes sense because of the lower density, and beside if there’s a bad situation like no wind, so sunshine, you can just have a few power lines from England.
Scotland can get away with that as it has lots of natural, renewable resources for the population. England doesn’t have the same options due to the vastly larger population and energy usage and less space per person for renewables.
It makes sense. Nuclear is absolutely a great long term investment for a solid baseline. And what I am seeing from down south doesn’t look like it’s doing that, rather leaping on the nuclear train because it’s popular with voters.
That’s a very bad way to aproach something as long term as nuclear power stations.
Comments are closed.