JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Psychoanalysis shows Nuclear Power stops countries meeting climate targets

Only higher education could produce something this silly.

The University of Sussex gets the credit for a paper that argues that countries that are committed to nuclear energy are progressing slower towards the holy grail of meeting “climate targets”. This discovery  coincidentally comes exactly as the UK Hinkley Point “hangs in the balance”. What were the odds?

The Newspeak starts in the headline — what’s a “climate target”. My personal climate target is to move into the tropics each winter, but the EU climate target is not about reducing temperatures over Spain, but about “more windmills”. The climate target of the EU has apparently got nothing much to do with the climate:

…the EU’s 2020 Strategy — to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, increase the share of renewable energy to at least 20% of consumption, and achieve energy savings of 20% or more by 2020…

 They cluster countries in to 3 groups and discover that the countries that plan to maintain or expand nuclear energy (eg Bulgaria, Hungary and the UK) are not cutting emissions as fast as countries that have no nukes (Denmark, Ireland, and Norway).

Could it be, I wonder, because countries that have nukes have already cut their emissions (they only start counting the reductions from 2005). I scoff, I must be missing something. That’s too obvious.

But then the paper proves me wrong and does national psychoanalysis:

The team say that the gigantic investments of time, money and expertise in nuclear power plants, such as the proposed Hinckley Point C in the UK, can create dependency and ‘lock-in’ — a sense of ‘no turning back’ in the nation’s psyche.

I turn to the actual paper, thinking this must be a marketing mistake. Not so.

You may have thought energy production was about joules per megawatt hour, but it’s really  a conditioning system of governance.

 Whereas nuclear is nowadays often regarded simply as one type of sociotechnical regime among many, several decades ago theorists recognized that the way they operate is quintessential of the deeply political self-reinforcing dynamics in infrastructures and institutions – and even more widely, in economies, cultures, and political discourse – that are better understood as conditioning systems of governance themselves.

Nuclear power creates totalitarian states?

As one environmentalist lamented in the 1970s: ‘The increased deployment of nuclear power facilities must lead society toward authoritarianism. Indeed, safe reliance upon nuclear power as the principal source of energy may be possible only in a totalitarian state’ (Winner, 1999Winner, L. (1999). The social shaping of technology. In MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J.(Eds.), The social shaping of technology (pp. 8–40). London:Longman., p. 19). Entrenchment of nuclear technologies require the structuring of social environments in particular ways (Winner,1986Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press., p. 32). Put simply, the distinctive nature of nuclear technologies provides a convenient means for reinforcing wider pressures towards concentrated power and authority.

So nukes are special and concentrate power and authority — unlike a global weather scare which can only be solved by One World Government, right?

The paper is freely available. Though Sussex University costs UK taxpayers a lot.

 

 REFERENCE

The University of Sussex : Nuclear energy and path dependence in Europe’s ‘Energy union’: coherence or continued divergence? Climate Policy,Volume 16, 2016 - Issue 5.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.9/10 (55 votes cast)
Psychoanalysis shows Nuclear Power stops countries meeting climate targets, 9.9 out of 10 based on 55 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/hfpem4a

136 comments to Psychoanalysis shows Nuclear Power stops countries meeting climate targets

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    The paper is freely available.

    Great. The roll in the bathroom is about to run out.

    292

  • #
    Ursus Augustus

    I read the title of this article “Psychoanalysis shows Nuclear Power stops countries meeting climate targets” and the expression “The Lewandowsky Effect” just popped into my mind. Why is that? What is the psychology of that?

    161

    • #
      tom0mason

      Probably something from your childhood.

      Mine is is the horrifying childhood image being locked in the same room as a pontificating bladder of lard trying to flip burgers and failing.

      71

    • #
      Yonniestone

      That’ll be Learned Behaviour, behavior is a response to a stimulus which under repetition results in acquired changes in behavior during one’s lifetime.

      Your offspring will eventually evolve this into an Innate behaviour given the stimulus of CAGW will be a constant for many future generations.

      91

  • #

    The abstract says

    Indeed, safe reliance upon nuclear power as the principal source of energy may be possible only in a totalitarian state’

    Such as the safe Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station in the Soviet Union?

    131

    • #

      Incidentally, the France produces 75% of its electricity from nuclear power. It might be a tad more authoritarian than USA (19%), Germany (16%), Canada (16%) or the UK (18%), but not overly so. I think France is far less authoritarian than either Russia (18%) or China (2%). But then climate alarmists never let real world statistical data contradict conjectured empirical relationships.

      370

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Kevin:
        I think you could amend that to “climate alarmists never let the real world I intrude on their theories.

        2 comments, both O/T.
        Reading The Wall Street Journal today (not my usual paper but free on the aeroplane) there were 2 articles that failed to refer disparagely to Trump. Indeed they contrasted his policies favourably with Hilary’s. There was also an article on those District Attorneys who tried to gang up on sceptics, in which the Constitutional Law Professor ridiculed their claims of immunity from Senatorial scrutiny.
        It took me two and a quarter hours to disembark at Heathrow, pass through border control and move to another terminal. The poms don’t need Brexit they need b*** under them. The ‘Free’ railroad is about the right price. Obvious poor maintenance, incompetent ‘time table’ and weird ‘public service announcements e.g. They recommended many times that “people with luggage should take the elevators”. 1 out of 4 was operating and everyone had to use them because the stairs were blocked off. I recommend that if you are using Heathrow Express to switch Terminals that you take a taxi if you haven’t got hours to waste.

        120

      • #
        theRealUniverse

        So Japan is fine having lost over 600 tons of nuclear material? (Fukushima, worst nuclear disaster ever , at least the Soviets buried Chernobyl in cement) They have no idea where it is..suspect allot of it is in the Pacific ocean drifting to the US. If you want to go to the Olympics in Tokyo 2020 put on your radiation suit. And yes Abe is a bit of a totalitarian leader. http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-a-nuclear-war-without-a-war-the-unspoken-crisis-of-worldwide-nuclear-radiation/28870
        Chernobyl had ONE reactor melt, Fukushima had THREE, and still open to the environment. This shows the level of corruption (Govt and Tepco coverup) in Japan.

        519

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          I would love to know where you got your information from. Can you supply a reference to the source, please?

          122

        • #
          MudCrab

          They have no idea where it is..suspect allot of it is in the Pacific ocean drifting to the US.

          Maybe it got eaten by the missing hot spot.

          81

          • #

            “Ken Buesseler, a radiochemist with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution ”
            “Buesseler’s work reveals that levels of radioactive forms of cesium in the ocean off Japan are thousands of times lower than during the peak releases in 2011, however, his analysis of cesium and strontium indicate releases from the plant are not yet “under control,” a statement that has been used by the Japanese government to described the situation when levels are below regulatory limits.”
            http://phys.org/news/2016-03-fukushima-site-leaking-years.html

            20

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Don’t bother responding to my previous question, I now see that you refer to Global Research (Center for Research on Globalisation). [My emphasis]

          The by-line is a bit of a giveaway as far as your motives are concerned, wouldn’t you agree? But let us discuss some of your facts.

          There were four reactors at Fukushima, two were comparitively old technology, and the others were of a more modern design. The two older reactors, Dachi 1 and Dachi 2, were due for replacement using the more modern design. This was politically blocked by the Conservation lobby, in Japan. One of the “features” of the old design, was that spent fuel rods would be removed, and transported off the site in trucks, similar in appearance to motor fuel bowsers, from the reactors, to a location where they could be disposed of safely. This maintenance procedure was also blocked by the Conservation lobby, in Japan. The spent fuel rods were therefore kept on site in large concrete “holding ponds” filled with continuously flowing water, powered by electric pumps, to keep them cool, and prevent radiation escaping.

          When the tsunami struck, it knocked out the electric pumps that kept the water circulating in the holding ponds. This allowed the temperature of the rods to increase, which evaporated the water, releasing some radiation into the atmosphere. Note, these were spent fuel rods, and although still radio active, they nowhere near as toxic as your source would want us to think. Fire tenders were used to keep the rods cool for a time, but due to the environmental damage, the fire tenders could not leave to refuel, neither could fuel tankers get onto the site to refuel them.

          Through all of this, the other two reactors continued to operate as designed, and were eventually shut down gracefully for engineering inspection.

          The only radioactive material to leave the site, at the time of the disaster and shortly afterwards was radioactive water that had come into contact with the cooling rods. The volume of this water is obviously miniscule in relation to the size of the pacific, and was quickly dispursed. The maps I have seen, and the maps you refer to on the site you quote, are those for airbourne particulate dispersion or “fall out” as it used to be called.

          Your “600 tons of nuclear material” is total BS. They (whoever “they” are) have no idea where it is, because it never existed in the first place. It is a fabricated number.

          Chernobyl had one reactor melt, Fukushima had none melt at the time of the tsunami. Dachi 1 has since been allowed to melt down under controlled conditions as being the easiest and safest way to remove it altogether. Chernobyl was the result of communist party bungling, and an ethos that workers may not go against the orders of their superiors. Fukushima is still open to the environment, because the place is, or was, totally shut down. I have not kept abreast of plans for a reopening.

          202

          • #

            About the meltdownS
            The information was revealed by Tokyo Electric Power Co. President Naomi Hirose
            “I would say it was a cover-up,” Hirose told a news conference. “It’s extremely regrettable.”
            https://www.rt.com/news/347637-fukushima-meltdown-cover-up-tepco/

            Chernobyl had one reactor melt, Fukushima had none melt at the time of the tsunami. Dachi 1 has since been allowed to melt down under controlled conditions as being the easiest and safest way to remove it altogether.

            This is like saying none of the twin towers came down at the time of plane impact.

            Also from that RT article.
            “The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the largest since the 1986 Chernobyl event, took place in March 2011 and resulted in three nuclear meltdowns and a leak of radioactive materials.”

            32

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              You can’t draw a parallel with the twin towers. Different engineering purpose – different design criteria.

              The reactors were (and most still are, I think), designed with a space below the core, within the containment vessel, so that in the event of a meltdown, the radioactive material has somewhere to melt to. That space contains material that can inhibit any further reaction from occurring.

              To go back to your twin towers anology, it is like the architect leaving sufficient space around any tower, over a given height, to give it somewhere to fall.

              The RT article I saw, contained aerial photographs of the site. On critical examination, it became obvious that somebody had “adjusted” the photographs using photoshop, or equivalent. The alterations were not of a professional standard. I pointed out the alterations, in some detail, on the EUReferendum blog (where they were shown by a contributor) and that was how and why I got approached to temporarily assist one of the scientific analysis teams.

              My impression then as now, is that whoever altered the photographs, was acting expendiently to try and make political capital over what was a serious disaster (the tsunami) for their own purposes. Those attempts to cynically alter history, and the engineering and scientific facts, just keep on popping up.

              I find it hard to not respond, when I can. It is like playing “Whack-a-mole”, although less fun.

              40

              • #
                theRealUniverse

                All 3 towers were brought down by controlled demolition, fact of physics.

                22

              • #
                crakar24

                That reminds me, i recently went to a quiz night run by the Engineering faculty of a university, one set of questions started like this.

                Q1, What is the melting point of steel.
                Q2, What temperature does aviation fuel reach when it is ignited
                Q3, What is the free fall speed of an object in a vaccuum
                .
                .
                .
                .
                .
                Q10, Who is this man (picture was displayed) the man was George Bush

                Cheers

                10

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                And now we see “theRealUniverse” using diversionary tactics, in terms of the controlled demolition of the World Trade Centre, to:

                a) Avoid addressing my previous comments about the “doctoring” of the pictures in the RT article;

                b) Avoiding the fact that the “meltdown” was into the containment vessel, as designed, and was therefore no immediate threat.

                c) Avoiding the fact that the radiation that was present at Fukushima was atmospheric radiation (water vapour) from the spent fuel rods that were never designed to be kept in cooling ponds for any length of time, but could not be transported off site for secure and safe destruction because of previous strong lobbying from the Japanese conservation movement.

                d) The finger prints of the Japanese conservation lobby were all over this near disaster.

                e) And I don’t care what your personal beliefs are either, and I wouldn’t go there. But I do care, when people are economical with the truth, or make up scenarios to win political points from disasters, in situations where other people suffer, through no fault of their own.

                f) I am not even accusing you, personally, of lying. But I do think you are somewhat naive, in the range of opinion you choose to canvas.

                30

              • #
                crakar24

                Just to add another layer of complexity………….the STUXNET virus was manufactured by a high level body, its purpose was to disable siemens controllers in nuclear power stations. It was found in the Iranian power station however it was found (lying dormant) in many computer systems around the world.

                It was found in computer systems in Japan, it is unknown if it was present at Fukushima prior to the incident and cannot be found now due to the damaged caused, Fukushima used siemens controllers similar to Iran.

                Perhaps the virus was the final piece of swiss cheese that enabled this incident to occur?

                00

          • #
            crakar24

            Dont forget RW Japan had those two other melt downs some years ago and look at those places now. Its ‘orrible i tells ya ‘orrible.

            20

            • #
              ROM

              Quoted from Jo’s headline post;

              As one environmentalist lamented in the 1970s: ‘The increased deployment of nuclear power facilities must lead society toward authoritarianism. Indeed, safe reliance upon nuclear power as the principal source of energy may be possible only in a totalitarian state’ (Winner, 1999Winner, L. (1999

              Chernobyl and Fukashima were a 7 on the Nuclear Event Scale of disasters

              I see no mention of the third worst nuclear disaster. That of the Kyshtym nuclear disaster in the Mayak nuclear research and development complex in the USSR in the western Urals of the USSR in 1957.

              The true death toll from the Kyshtym accident is not really known as it was reported by a worker from the Kyshtym / Mayak centere some years later that Gulag prisoners were sent onto the highly radio active lake where the radioactive waste material had flowed to from the ruptured tanks, to clean up the lake.
              The prisoners were never told that the whole lake and area was highly radio active and it would lead to their fairly rapid deaths.

              So the USSR has had at least two major nuclear accidents all whilst under the totalitarianism of the Communist Party.

              To Chernobyl and Fukashima you can add Kyshtym, plus Three Mile Island where the containment vessel, not found on Soviet nuclear power reactors, stopped almost the complete radiation leakage from the reactor core as it came within a few minutes of melt down.
              Plus the one that was literally seconds from getting away and wiping out a good part of England with radiation, the Windscale fire in the carbon moderated pile of the Windscale reactor in 1957.

              So for interest ;
              [ quoted ]

              Calculated deaths per Terawatt hour

              Wind power proponent and author Paul Gipe estimated in Wind Energy Comes of Age that the mortality rate for wind power from 1980–1994 was 0.4 deaths per terawatt-hour.
              Paul Gipe’s estimate as of end 2000 was 0.15 deaths per TWh, a decline attributed to greater total cumulative generation.

              Hydroelectric power was found to to have a fatality rate of 0.10 per TWh (883 fatalities for every TW·yr) in the period 1969–1996

              Nuclear power is about 0.04 deaths/TWh.

              Ref; Deaths per TWH by energy source [ dated 2011 ]

              20

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              I accept that Japan has had other nuclear “events”. But like any engineering endeavor, you have to look at the whole lifestyle, and plan for decommissioning as part of the design process; and then follow those plans! The Japanese did that for Fukushima, but were not permitted to execute the proper decommissioning plans, by the politically powerful conservation lobby, and so, they were forced into using expedient work-arounds.

              People have to decide if they want nuclear power or not, If they do, they need to do it properly, using the best current engineering practices available at each stage of the life cycle, without any external political interference. If they don’t want nuclear power, then they should not even turn the first sod.

              20

        • #

          Is that Abe guy still posting here. Here is an image…

          http://dotageeks.com/super-mario/

          10

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          600 tonnes? You are a desperate worrier!

          Give us an itemised breakdown of what makes up your 600 tonnes.

          Even if it was pure poison, have you any idea what the concentration would be by the time it reached the US?

          40

        • #
          Asmilwho

          “Worst nuclear disaster ever”

          … in which nobody has actually died or got sick from radiation

          50

      • #
        tom0mason

        “Incidentally, the France produces 75% of its electricity from nuclear power. It might be a tad more authoritarian than USA (19%), Germany (16%), Canada (16%) or the UK (18%), but not overly so.”

        Yes Kevin, but are they all in the same authoritarian basket of countries with North Korea?

        20

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      It is not nuclear power that they should be concerned about. It is the psychoactive substances, that have found their way into the ground water, that they should be worrying over.

      180

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Psychoactive Marxism found it’s way into Canberra’s groundwater decades ago, many suggest it was introduced by socialist Howler monkeys.

        211

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          That is interesting. I met a young woman from Canberra, when I was working in South East Asia. She was very leggy, very blond, and totally loony. So there you go …

          151

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        Methinks it’s more likely the psychoactive substances they snort.

        And, Yonniestone, there have been mushrooms in the water at Canberra for as long as I can remember. Good men soon disappear when they go there. Some Queenslanders survived because they brought their own XXXX.

        30

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          And why do Australians refer to their ale as XXXX? It is because they can’t spell BEER.

          10

          • #
            crakar24

            Only Queenslanders drink XXXX, if you had said this joke in a non QLD bar you would have been corrected in a much less pleasant way LOL

            cheers

            10

    • #

      Switzerland is the most democratic country in the world. They have nuclear power and the people there not only vetoed to have nuclear power but in a referendum a couple of years ago voted to retain nuclear power. Other countries such as Finland, Taiwan, South Africa, Argentina, Canada and Israel have democratic elections.
      How do papers like that which are so wrong get published? Pal review or just incompetence?

      80

      • #
        crakar24

        Well actually Israel have a nuclear power station but they dont use it to generate power just like here in OZ (we use it for different purposes than them)……….which raises the question can one become a totalitarian state for just having a power station or does it have to produce electrickery as well?

        30

    • #
      Allen Ford

      The Swiss are also dab hands at nuclear power generation:

      Nuclear power in Switzerland is generated by four nuclear power plants, with a total of five operational reactors (see list below). In 2013, they produced 24.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity, down 5.8% from 2007, when 26.4 TWh were produced. Nuclear power accounted for 36.4% of the nation’s gross electricity generation of 68.3 TWh, while 57.9% was produced by hydroelectric plants and 5.7% came from conventional thermal power stations and non-hydro renewable energy sources.

      As the oldest, continuous democracy on the planet, I don’t see them becoming totalitarian any time soon !

      60

    • #
      Mari C

      Somebody learned a few big words – totalitarian is so newvo – and had to work it into something garbled and fantastical to remember it.

      Sounds like gibberish I used to hear from my ex when he was in hospital after surgery – and still flying on the pain meds.

      10

  • #
    Phil R

    Sociology – the study of a group of people that don’t need studying by a group of people who do.

    371

  • #
    tom0mason

    I’m sorry if this upsets anybody but comments such as -

    Whereas nuclear is nowadays often regarded simply as one type of sociotechnical regime among many, several decades ago theorists recognized that the way they operate is quintessential of the deeply political self-reinforcing dynamics in infrastructures and institutions – and even more widely, in economies, cultures, and political discourse – that are better understood as conditioning systems of governance themselves.

    only comes from an idiot with a pig’s bladder for a brain. Or the self-serving pomposity of a Lysenko style communist lackey referencing their own acolytes in the echo-chamber of their own making.
    The crass illogically beggers belief! Nuclear energy powers the country! Are these people sane? Who allows this very, very bad psychosocial babble dressed-up as some sort of worthy script to be published?

    Coupled to this is their excessive pseudo-technical verbosity rendering a bloated verisimilitude to their impoverished understanding of the subject!
    If this is the depth to which British education has sunk then there is no hope for them. The UK taxpayer is being swınÐled.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Here is some real psychology from someone who understood national psychoanalysis: Shakespeare –

    “Who knows himself a braggart,
    Let him fear this, for it will come to pass
    that every braggart shall be found an ass.”
    (All’s Well Than Ends Well, act 4, sc. 3)

    Phew!
    I need to go out and cool off…

    100

    • #
      tom0mason

      So what are the struggling to say?

      Whereas nuclear is nowadays often regarded simply as one type of sociotechnical regime among many,
      This is patently false.
      Nuclear energy is a way of generating power, enough to power societies needs. It is not a ‘sociotechnical regime’ it is a means to an end — to empower all with cost effective electricity and that is all.

      several decades ago theorists recognized that the way they operate is quintessential of the deeply political self-reinforcing dynamics in infrastructures and institutions
      Complete hokum! A theory of what? That the nuclear industry will pervert politics and society to its needs and wants?

      And finally…

      – and even more widely, in economies, cultures, and political discourse – that are better understood as conditioning systems of governance themselves.

      What does this blather says? That the dynamism of our societies are well understood? And that nuclear power conditions us to limit the scope of our thinking? I do not think so.

      191

      • #
        James Murphy

        Well, one could argue that politics drove the USA spend a fortune on liquid metal fast breeder reactors at the expense of other nuclear technology in the early 1970s, and politics within the Atomic Energy Commission which drove Alvin Weinberg from his position at Oak Ridge Labs, and killed all existing funding for Thorium/Uranium-233 molten salt reactor research.

        Plutonium from light water reactors was meant to be extracted, and used to fuel the fast breeder reactors (it’s what made them viable, given their much larger fuel requirements), but political decisions were made to ban this reprocessing, whilst still spending billions on fast breeder research anyway…

        Then there was Gerald Ford who thought that all this money spent on nuclear power was just money which should have gone to developing solar power… but I digress.

        Regardless of all this, the authors of this paper should go to their rooms, and stay their until they realise where they went wrong.

        101

        • #
          James Murphy

          What a disastrous use of ‘their’ in my last line!

          30

        • #
          Kratoklastes

          The skewing of research priorities in the nukular energy ‘space’ was driven primarily by the US Department of Killing Foreigners (I refuse to use the propaganda term ‘Defence’).

          Alvin Weinberg was booted from his directorship at Oak Ridge because he spent decades advocating for low-risk Thorium reactors – one of which ran for the best part of 4 years in the 60s.

          The Thorium approach has one pitfall (from the viewpoint of the Tödeskrameren of the US Death Machine): it doesn’t produce highly-radioactive byproducts that can be used as inputs into nukular weapons.

          The ability of .gov to stifle the existence of the program has led to a situation in which it is possible to have a PhD in nuclear energy research, and never have heard of Thorium reactors.

          Also, it seems that the ‘subsidies to BIG’ that are favoured by .gov played a part. Subsidies to big are putatively because of ‘economies of scale’, but actually because politicians love having their names on plaques, and they get more ego-strokes from a name on a plaque on a big thing. Only Krugster can find any evidence for economies of scale above the small-factory size – and he just makes stuff up as it suits him (the logical outcome of his purported claims about .gov efficiency is that we could get infinite growth if government was 100% of the economy).

          No politician wants household-sized electricity generation that works – where a fist-sized ball of an abundant non-volatile fuel can provide electricity for a household almost in perpetuity.

          That’s because the way politicians get rich is through ‘side payments’ (they all leave office FAR richer than could be achieved on their salaries, given any plausible combination of savings rates and rates of return). You can’t get bribed unless there are rents; you can’t get rents unless there’s artificial oligopoly.

          60

      • #
        ExWarmist

        Whoops – my comment ended up here

        11

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Tom,

        I think it all says,

        Send the men with a straight jacket and send some dogs out to look for my mind which I have clearly lost somewhere.

        31

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          straightjacket

          21

          • #
            Ted O'Brien.

            Curious, that. I have always been tempted to be, and occasionally have been a stickler for the English spelling, despite the fact that I often see good sense in the American spelling in our language. But straitjacket was always one to which I gave a free pass. Here comes Roy, of at least equal standing to myself, stickling for the old spelling! You can learn a bit more every day.

            Given that the topic under discussion includes psychowhatever, and the subject s political, note this paradox:

            The Australian Labor Party, formed about 1890, used the American spelling of Labor, not the English Labour, because the Americans were the heroes who had got rid of British rule.

            For 50 years now the US have been the villains who stopped Communism from taking over the whole world, while the ALP, who I wouldn’t dignify with the title of Australian Labo(u)r by whatever spelling, has morphed into a party of Marxists. So the world turns, psychospeaking.

            20

            • #
              AndyG55

              The word comes from its purpose, a “restriction” jacket.

              hence… straitjacket

              However.. spell it how you like. :-)

              41

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Indeed, spell it as you wish. The objective is communication not to debate the nuances of spelling. I’ve seen arguments that removal of all the vowels from a word will still leave it readable almost always. So how much harm can the presence or absence of a sngl spc cs?

                20

              • #
                AndyG55

                I try to spell thing correctly..

                … but my typing often defeats that intent.

                21

              • #
                tom0mason

                Yes Roy,

                The English language is full of hard and fast rules that are readily broken.

                ‘i’ before ‘e’ except when a foreigner or local neighbor would lend either weigh or height to their leisure, has to forfeit, albeit to a spelling deity, to neither understand nor seize upon their linguistic atheism. My seismic seizure of the subject is only done to hilite the leitmotiv of the banal science of the sovereign English language’s etymology.

                Maybe it should read — ‘i’ before ‘e’ guess when that will be.

                20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Tom,

                If you want easier rules learn Spanish. Spelling and pronunciation are a piece of cake. On the other hand, they speak it so fast it sounds like gobbledygook and to say the same thing in Spanish takes about 1.5 to 2 times as much space on the screen as it does to use English — a fact I ran into when I got hired to modify a project to allow “nationalization”, the process of allowing someone selling your software in-country to have an in-country native speaker translate everything from English so it’s done right without the developers having to do it… …complicated as anything I ever saw but we made it work.

                Then there’s that feminine/masculine thing to master. La, los, el, las and whatsis. Needless to say I didn’t go on with Spanish after the first introductory course I was required to take. I probably should have but learning to speak binary, octal and hexadecimal versions of languages ranging from hard numeric machine code to assembler to C++ and others has been more than enough fun for one lifetime.

                English was not my favorite subject and if it was not for decent spell checkers I would be lost in the desert to this day. And my secret to getting things like straightjacket right (which I didn’t) is to suspect the two words are written as one and see whether Chrome likes it or not. If not it tells me and if I don’t get a complaint then I know my guess is correct.

                20

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                So, psychos peaking, I was fundamentally wrong too. Thanks for that. I should have known.

                10

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                I didn’t put that space in ‘psychospeaking’, and I didn’t proof read it.

                10

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Ted,

              I just see what Chrome likes and then use whichever it accepts (see above). I didn’t pay enough attention when typing fast so I missed the guess and made it 2 words.

              Far be it from me to claim to be an expert on any variant of English.

              20

              • #
                Geoff Sherrington

                Spelling has to be correct in science, no matter how hard.
                Early in my chemistry training, I learned not to confuse “insulin” with “inulin”. They are completely different chemicals. The correct labelling of pharmaceuticals generally is another example of this need.
                There are spelling errors on blogs, including mine. Sometimes these are from technique or autocorrect. Sometimes they look like the author did not know what is correct.
                I discount the value of a blog comment of the latter type. This includes all examples of apostrophe misuse. The apostrophe rules are trivially simple. People who consistently get them wrong need to take 10 minutes to learn and improve their credibility.
                Geoff

                20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Geoff,

                Remind me sometime to tell you a few stories about how hard it is for a hospital to get the right drug to the right patient at the right time. Needless to say, the more rules they make to protect against wrong pill or wrong dosage, the harder it seems to be to get it right.

                00

  • #
    ScotstsmaninUtah

    The Dutch are not opting for nuclear…

    By 2025 all new cars must be non fossil fuel based, Trains will be powered by windmills and solar panels are to be intergrated into the highways.

    http://www.sciencealert.com/the-netherlands-is-making-moves-to-ban-all-non-electric-vehicles-by-2025

    At this news ( published in April this year) Brexit seems even more of a great idea.

    I am hearing rumours of a reduction in corporation tax and VAT sales tax :D

    151

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I am hearing rumours of a reduction in … VAT sales tax

      That can’t be right. When (if) Brexit actually happens, the value of goods and services will go up, so the VAT should actually increase.

      61

      • #

        ” … the VAT should actually increase.”
        In my day, 70s/early 80s, 50% of VAT went to Europe. (I used to benefit from some of it actually coming back in the form of “less favoured area” funding.) So if Brexit comes off, double the amount stays at home :-)

        On topic, I think this attempt to associate of nukes with totalitarianism is a recycling of the anti-nukes SJW antics of 30+ years ago. The NUM could stick it to the country every so often until Thatcher cracked down, but watch out having a go at a nuclear facility, such as Windscale/Sellafield that was busy dumping plutonium on the beach and out into the Irish Sea. Guarded by hard-cases, some of them armed. No lefty support there.

        31

    • #
      tom0mason

      ScotstsmaninUtah

      My prediction –
      Sales of bicycles in Holland will rise massively.

      70

    • #
      Roger

      and the EU response to rumours of a reduction in UK corporation tax is to threaten a tougher line on Brexit negotiations….

      Conveniently ignoring that Ireland reduced corporation tax to minimal levels to attract the headquarters of international organisations trading in the EU; ignoring the fact that Juncker (EU President) as president of Luxembourg structured their tax and VAT system in an even cheaper and more complex way to encourage and enable international companies to set up head offices in Luxembourg and to AVOID taxes in other EU states and elsewhere in the world ……

      PS:
      Did you see the EU publicising that ‘EU’ competitors won more olympic medals than anyone else ? Guido Fawkes (order-order.com) probably the most switched on UK political commentary site and heavily in favour of Brexit responded with :

      “The former countries of the British Empire won 396 medals – 138 more medals than a post-Brexit EU. While the European Parliament invents an EU state to “win” the Olympics, the medal tally of a one-time actual supra-state leaves Brussels for dust. Former member countries of the British Empire accrued 76 more medals than the rest of the world (24%). In all, the Empire’s score of 137 gold medals trounces the EU’s, which after removing Great Britain sits at just 79.

      Looking at other alliances NATO countries took a stunning 443 out of the 974 medals on offer (45%), while Anglosphere countries grabbed a whopping 288 – 30% of the world total. This is compared to Francophone states’ measly 87 (9%), even with Canada’s 22 (2%) generously included. Hoisting the colours appears to have been good luck; countries with Union Jacks in their flags took a massive 115 medals, of which 40 were gold!”

      90

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      Poor Dutch!

      41

    • #
      Annie

      I’m sorry you had such a bad experience at LHR. We came into LGW a few weeks ago and the actual arrival went smoothly and quickly. Unfortunately our experience then deteriorated, trying to get from the North terminal to the South terminal to pick up our hire car…Phew! Hot, crowded, busy…yuk. just as well we didn’t have to drive very far…we had come straight from MEL.

      As for the A303 and the M6, don’t ask!

      This was meant as a reply to Graeme no 3 at 3.1.1 but disappeared when the server played up…

      30

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Thanks, I have cooled down a bit now, but Border Control was less than a joke. As hordes decended staff went off for tea (5pm). So as an Aussie I got into the queue for sub-humans, which took some time with only 2 gates going. Another arrived as I got through. There followed endless corridors and lifts as I tried to move from Terminal 2 to Terminal 4. The rail service might have been a good idea once, but what with having to change platforms twice, and missing out on 2 trains because they were small, not the normal number of carriages I sat on the original platform waiting for the third offering which arrived 18 minutes later than promised, then sat in the station for another 3-4 minutes. The final straw was arriving at Terminal 4 to find that the HEATHROW HILTON wasn’t there but another 8 minutes away down yet another corridor (although this one was elevated over roads). I really do wonder about those backers of BREXIT who expect Aussies to fall into line touching their forelocks gratefully.
        The papers here are starting to wonder what this winter will bring in the way of blackouts. A bit late now, and I don’t fancy the new PM’s chances of sorting it out. It will take more than one blackout before commonsense prevails based on SA’s behaviour. And there are people here in the UK who can match SA’s politicians for ( lack of forward thinking ) – that should get through MOD rather what I would really describe them as.

        40

        • #
          Annie

          Well Graeme No.3, what a ghastly time you have had. I am a backer of Brexit and had supposed that when this properly comes to pass our Commonwealth cousins would be treated in a much more civilised way. It has infuriated me for years that I, as a British Citizen, should be lumped in with all the d….d EU when I could see Aussies, Kiwis, being treated like foreigners.

          30

  • #
    TinyCO2

    You’ve got to wonder if the report was written in crayon because they’re not allowed sharp pencils. All the more obvious answers rejected – infrastructure, politics, finance, industry, demand, resources, starting point….

    UK young adults were furious that oldies had voted for Brexit. It might mean qualified people like those who wrote this report might have to get another job – one suitable to their abilities… you know I’m not sure that they’re even qualified to clean toilets.

    151

    • #
      ExWarmist

      William of Ockham is rolling in his grave.

      51

    • #
      ExWarmist

      I spent 7 months of my working life cleaning toilets.

      It certainly taught me a thing or two.

      61

      • #
        Another Ian

        ExWarmist

        Your work song was the one that starts

        “My job is to clean
        An army latrine
        I’m the man with the plan
        For the pan that everyone uses”?

        30

      • #
        TinyCO2

        There’s nothing ignoble about cleaning toilets, it’s a job that needs doing. However a basic skill would be to recognise poop whn you see it and the authors of this report are scatalogically challenged.

        70

    • #
      delcon2

      Yea,but McDonalds can probably teach them to flip burgers.

      41

      • #
        ROM

        From a couple of warmist trolls who have appeared here on Jo’s blog a couple of times I think that the most rabid of warmists regard telephone cleaners as a good deal lower status than toilet cleaners.

        On my part, my grateful thanks to those who clean toilets when I have to use nice clean, well looked after toilet facilities whether public or private.

        The alternative, well we won’t go there on this blog nor literally in the real world outside if we can avoid it.

        71

  • #
    Ruairi

    The warmists are hungry for power,
    But at nuclear stations they glower,
    And us taken for fools,
    To think it was joules,
    As produced per kilowatt hour.

    141

  • #
    AndyG55

    There is only one group of sociotechnical, totalitarian, energy supply types..

    They are called “renewables”

    72

  • #
    AndyG55

    “That the nuclear renewable industry will pervert politics and society to its needs and wants? ”

    fixed. !!

    122

  • #
    Manfred

    …the deeply political self-reinforcing dynamics in infrastructures and institutions – and even more widely, in economies, cultures, and political discourse – that are better understood as conditioning systems of governance themselves.

    That statement perfectly sums up the UN bureaucratic totalitarian regime noisily waiting in the wings for the implementation of global administration by 2030. The academics at the University of Sussex, profess,

    Our research expertise contributes to practical business and social applications, and our influence on policy debates in national and international fora is widely respected.

    This statement emerges from the Sussex aim which holds that,

    ‘Sussex’s combination of research and fearlessness is shaping the future of policy and practice in economics, health, culture, climate change and more. Come to Sussex. Let’s change things.’

    Their shattering research into the psychoanalysis (classic Freudian? I thought this had been substantially discredited, and supplanted by a psychotherapeutic approach, or even more recently, the relaxed navel gazing of ‘mindfulness’?) is merely a journalistic ploy, a hook, a distracting draw. On its own the rewritten title: “Nuclear Power stops countries meeting climate targets” would sound as nonsensical and puerile and it reads.

    The Sussex crowd reveal their immersion in UN Global Group Think. Their vernacular betrays this, as does the University ‘mission vignette’ and the stated research expertise, which expresses a desire to ‘change things’ without describing what to.

    Should one have any doubts about that why not try glancing casually through the following for further insight? It’s the antithesis of a future for prosperous free thinking, free peoples desirous of remaining free.


    UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)

    ECOSOC as a unifying platform for sustainable development

    UN NGO Branch of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs

    Transforming our world: the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

    United Nations E/2014/INF/5 UN Economic and Social Council
    List of non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council as of 1 September 2014

    UN Regional Information Centre for Western Europe. Figueres: First time the world economy is transformed intentionally

    UNEP A to Z of activties, UNEP – from outcome to implemetation.

    UNEP Finance Initiative a global partnership between UNEP and the financial sector. Over 200 institutions, including banks, insurers and fund managers, work with UNEP to bring about systemic change in finance to support a sustainable world.

    50

  • #
    TedM

    Another typical so called scientific paper, where the “conclusion” was written before the “methodology” was devised.

    91

  • #

    Not only that, nukes are bad for the diesel and gas industries. What would happen to sales if places like South Australia stopped their emergency generation? Nukes are like coal…no gazillion dollar fossil fuel backup needed. The stuff just works.

    Hmm, no wonder Big Oil hates coal and nukes more than wind and solar.
    http://science.time.com/2012/02/02/exclusive-how-the-sierra-club-took-millions-from-the-natural-gas-industry-and-why-they-stopped/

    You can’t expect Coca Cola not to hate Pepsi, right?

    91

  • #
    Dennis

    What was that about Urcranium?

    60

  • #
    ExWarmist

    As soon as the term “political discourse” is introduced, then all subsequent words are subject to a polymorphic meaning field where the actually meaning of the words is determined at run time at the point of reading by subjecting each word to an appropriately type constrained ideological interface.

    It should all be clear…

    When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

    ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

    80

    • #

      Newspeak –
      Orwell got it,
      Plato did it
      TYRANNY as FREEDOM.

      Discussion in the cloistered policy-decision-chamber
      in the Politics Department of Sussex University:

      ‘Look we hafta’ say,
      ‘nuclear bad, authoritarian,
      renewables good, free choice of the people.’

      ‘Yeah, that should do the trick.’

      101

  • #
    el gordo

    The Guardian suggests: If wind and solar power are cheaper and quicker, do we really need Hinkley Point?

    Tidal Pools are looking good too.

    91

    • #
      James Murphy

      Here in France, Hinkley Point indecision is seen to be a predominately financial matter for EDF (can they afford it, can’t they afford it…?), and as a way of keeping the French nuclear industry ticking over (which is supported by the French government). A few weeks ago, I think EDF agreed to proceed, though it was not a unanimous decision by any means.

      As for renewables – this one power plant is supposed to supply 7% of Britains energy by itself… I can only imagine just how many bird mincers would be needed to do that 24/7.

      Then there’s the matter of profits – the British government signed a deal with EDF in 2013 which means that when power prices are below 92.50 pounds per MWh, then the British taxpayers cover the difference, which, by all accounts is a significant difference… and could well have EDF laughing all the way to la banque. ooh la la…

      71

      • #
        el gordo

        Then there’s security concerns.

        ‘Computer experts fear Chinese-designed software would be wide open to bugs planted during routine maintenance and set to crash at any time in the future.

        ‘At times of global tension between China and the West — not unlikely over the lifetime of a power plant — this would leave Britain dangerously exposed to blackmail by Beijing.’

        The Sun

        50

  • #
    Robber

    Off topic, but yet more nonsense “research” from Climate Institute reported in The Australian today:

    Heat, less water at 1.5C warming: report

    “Heatwaves for one month each year and 10 per cent less water Australia-wide are just some impacts predicted even if the globe meets the most optimistic goal of an international climate agreement.
    New research, commissioned by the Climate Institute, found Australia would be significantly impacted if the globe warms by 1.5C – the aspirational target at last year’s United Nations climate change conference.
    At that temperature the north of the country would experience heatwaves for one month each year, while the south would be hit for about two weeks.
    Coral reefs would be severely impacted and there would be 10 per cent less water nationwide, and up to 30 per cent less in some regions.
    The globe is now experiencing warming of about 1C, a level the institute says is already dangerous.”

    Wow, I hadn’t realized what a dangerous climate we are experiencing right now, compared with 100 years ago. Did I miss something?

    110

    • #
      Annie

      We are missing something somewhere…our paddocks are very soggy at present but apparently it’s not good old H2O.

      71

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … there would be 10 per cent less water nationwide, …

      Waddya reckon cobber? Have we got enough stubbies ter see us through? Or should we stump up fer another truck load?

      51

  • #
    Dennis

    I wonder what the ratbag element will say about Thorium Molten Salt reactors?

    40

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      “Wot?”

      00

      • #
        crakar24

        “World of Tanks”?

        Based on what I know about the ratbag element is they dont know what an element is HA HA get it?…sorry i shall continue, if you remove the word reactor and dont mention the “U” word then they wont have anything to say because they are too stupid to understand.

        I once debated a ratbag about this subject and i offered them one chance to convince me nuclear reactors are bad they listed.

        1, they melt down
        2, the waste
        3, nuclear bombs

        I responded with

        1, Thorium
        2, Thorium
        3, Thorium

        They responded with

        1, Denier
        2, Denier
        3, Denier

        20

    • #
      AndyG55

      The only thing that bothers me about going to thorium reactors, is that it might lead to a reduction in atmospheric CO2.

      20

  • #
    Margebouvie

    As someone living in one of those totalitarian regimes that uses nuclear power (Canada), I have to tell you all it’s hell, pure living hell!

    *Ignore all those UN reports about how great it is here. More lies!

    40

    • #

      Quoting Margebouvie:

      As someone living in one of those totalitarian regimes that uses nuclear power (Canada), I have to tell you all it’s hell, pure living hell!

      *Ignore all those UN reports about how great it is here. More lies!

      End of Quote

      Since almost zero of the readers here believe that Canada is a totalitarian regime and some of us live in places that are neither as comfortable as Canada nor so well protected by a Charter of Rights and Bill of Rights, your statements may not be convincing.

      Could you add to your comment so we might appreciate why you see things differently.

      50

      • #
        D. J. Hawkins

        I think it’s actually a reverse B’rer Rabbit strategy. You know, “Welcome to the Jersey Shore. Now go home”.

        20

  • #
    John Michelmore

    We have tidal/wave power station in SA that has played its part in preventing us reaching are climate alarmism target. Unfortunately it sank at Carrickalinga 300 km from where it was supposed to be. now it provides a nice environment for a future coral reef and fish sanctuary, or a nice water ski jump, So there are hidden benefits from renewable projects!

    111

  • #
    TdeF

    Why not an opinion from a zoologist on Nuclear Power? A zoologist is a scientist. A man who studied long dead kangaroos is a scientist.

    So we have leading scientist and climate change ‘guru’ Tim Flannery

    In 2006
    “Climate change is so catastrophic and imminent that only nuclear power can save us,”

    Tim Flannery in 2007
    THE Australian of the Year, Tim Flannery, has rejected the use of nuclear power in Australia, reversing his position that electricity could be generated using uranium with less risk to the environment than that posed by coal.

    and in 2015
    “the chances of a nuclear revival seem slender indeed.

    So who needs psychologists and economists and bankers to advise on science matters when you have divination from kangaroos? When is a scientist not a scientist?

    Anyway Flannery’s crowd funded Climate Council on page 3 of the Australian further lectures the world seriously on how they should save 0.5C by crippling their economies, a temperature difference which is so small as to be not significant at the start of the 20th century. You get bigger temperature differences crossing the street.

    91

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Tdef, here is a little trick that I learnt in the Punjab:

      Try asking the question the other way around. Instead of asking, “What does a scientist who studies dead kangaroos know about Climate Change?” You should ask, “What does a Nuclear Engineer know about Taxidermy?”

      10

  • #
    pat

    instead of funding psychobabble, the pollies had better sort this out:

    can’t copy the following, but Carbon Brief writes:

    - Britain’s flagship scheme for keeping the lights on this winter has been scrapped after failing to find a enough participants. National Grid planned to pay big businesses to turn off or down their equipment if there was a spike in demand or a drop in supply. It proved vital last when several power plants unexpectedly shut down, but too few users were willing to put themselves on standby this year. This illustrates “the difficulties policymakers are having in balancing the UK’s electricity supplies”, the Financial Times writes. However, a spokesman said that the failure of the scheme would not result in blackouts this winter, the Telegraph reports. -

    22 Aug: Financial Times: Kiran Stacey: Emergency winter electricity scheme cancelled
    (ends with) National Grid remains committed to paying companies to reduce their demand, although through different mechanisms.
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/99ac8702-6871-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f.html

    22 Aug: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: ‘Last resort’ power plan scrapped as businesses decline to cut their usage
    (National Grid) was seeking to recruit businesses that could reduce their demand by 177 megawatts (MW), but only had offers totalling about 30 MW from firms willing to take part in the scheme between 5pm and 6pm, the hour when UK demand typically hits the absolute peak and the last resort measures are most likely to be needed.
    A spokesman insisted the failure of the scheme would not affect National Grid’s ability to keep the lights on this winter, as it has already procured extra generation capacity through a separate last-resort scheme that pays old power plants to stay open on standby…
    Electricity supplies available in the normal UK market are expected to be even scarcer this year than last (LINK), making it more likely that the last resort schemes are needed…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/22/last-resort-power-plan-scrapped-as-businesses-decline-to-cut-the/

    Carbon Brief also has the following which I can’t access (quota done):

    Theresa May can reduce carbon emissions or protect British jobs – not both
    Carbon reduction “destroys jobs”, claims David Green in the Telegraph: “raising productivity and encouraging higher wages are not compatible with carbon reduction”. Since 2008 the government’s policies have “added to the cost of electricity”, led to the closure of two aluminium smelters, and threatened the steel industry, he argues…

    61

  • #
    ROM

    Climate alarmist science is finally coming to resemble the fabled “Ouija Bird“.

    The “Ouija Bird” of rural philosophy gets very confused and just flies in ever decreasing circles until it flies up its own fundament and disappears forever.
    ————
    A climate scientist requires funding so they submit a proposal for the funding of a project and a paper in accordance with the requirements the science funding bureacrats who will approve and provide the funding, have drawn up.

    The paper is written in accordance with the requirements of the funding bureacrats.

    The bureaucrats read the paper or its outline and say that research doesn’t look good for the climate so we had better draw up another project funding requirement to attract proposals to examine and research that aspect of the climate in deeper depth.

    A climate scientist whether alarmist or not requires funding so they submit a proposition for the funding of a project and paper in accordance with the requirements the bureacrats who will approve and provide the funding, have drawn up.

    The paper is written in accordance with the requirements >>>>>>>>>>>

    ————

    And around and around they all go with little in the way of constructive science being accomplished until it all eventually falls apart and the lot disappears up its own fundament as the tax payer’s funds eventually run out .

    Hence the fabled Ouija Bird comparison between climate alarmist science and its iron bound clasp of death with the climate science funding bureacrats of the alarmist science funding bureaucracies.

    Now all birds have parasites, some of them quite nasty.

    One of the most prominent and nastiest parasites that hang off and greedily feed off the the Climate alarmist Ouija Bird science is the “Pschyos” of the Psycho analyst industry, the Lewendowsky’s, the 10;10 child killers video producers, the McKibbens of this world and the numerous pseudo scientific psycho analysis that is created out of thin air through the unleashing of the unbridled bigotry and arrogance and condescension of just another group of Climate psychos as we see in Jo’s headline piece today.

    Let it continue for just a little longer and not only will the Ouija Bird of Climate alarmist science disappear up its own fundament for good we hope but hopefully it will take all its innumerable parasitical psycho’s and their scientific mirage of psycho-analytic research into oblivion with it.

    41

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Can I submit a proposal for funding a project that will shove these nut cases up their own anatomy until they disappear? Or is it may I submit…?

      Thoughts of nuclear power are confusing me on that point. I must already be totalitarian. That’s the only possible explanation.

      31

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Roy,

        I wouldn’t say you were totally totalitarian. You are somewhat totalitarian, which would make you a someitarian, or perhaps a partitarian, or even a bititarian.

        Whatever.

        10

        • #
          crakar24

          Roy appears to be a fence sitter on nuclear power so by my reckoning he would have to be a semi-terian………….sorry another bad joke.

          00

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            In my experience, fence sitting is often unpleasant, sometimes painful, and causes you to walk funny. The only positive thing is, you can’t slouch if you are sitting on a fence.

            00

    • #
      TdeF

      Frankly I always found putting pyschology in the Science department odd. Zoology too. Botany. As Flannery so well illustrates, you can get a PhD in Science today without studying any science at all at undergraduate level and then claim to be a scientist expert in many fields with science skills beyond that of say a journalist or historian. There really needs to be a Science Fiction department.

      71

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        The Shorter Oxford Dictionary lists the suffix, “ology” as, a subject of study, a branch of knowledge.

        It also lists the suffix, “ist” as, a person who make a systematic study of a particular art or science or who is occupied with something professionally or on a large scale.

        Thus, an “‘ologist” is a passive observer, whereas an “‘ist”, as in Physist, is an active participant.

        You can draw your own conclusions from that.

        00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Ha ha ha hahahahahahahahahahahaha… …hahahahaha… These people are better than Laurel and Hardy and Abbott and Costello combined. “Who’s on first” in another “fine kettle of fish you’ve gotten me into” While Stan cries and looks like an emissions specialist with some outfit advising these… …these what?

    Please, Jo! I nearly died laughing at this one. I had to be taken to the emergency room to be given tranquilizers just to catch my breath. They operate tomorrow morning to remove my funny bone before it will be safe for me to go home.

    Who do I sue to recover the cost of all this? Our insurance will not cover it.

    Ha ha ha, gurgle, gurgle…

    51

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Psychoanalysis of exactly what or is it who? Well let’s get it right, the guy’s name is probably Whom. And what exactly is Whom’s problem? He’s a stark staring raving lunatic for even thinking about nuclear power — I guess.

      Nitwit isn’t a good enough description for these good Earth loving and caring folks. No no. We need a better term, something like, ahem, well I think you can guess because I suspect Jo would be upset if I said it.

      31

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Who issued the University of Sussex a license to operate?

        Who the Hell do these people think they are? Oops! I already asked that question about some other group and no one knew the answer. :-(

        41

  • #
    ROM

    These following headlines are from the GWPF site today.
    The GWPF in its Forum site just mostly repeats what is being openly published elsewhere.

    Are the following headlines a sign of the times when it comes to way that science at every level is now becoming increasingly regarded by the public and becoming more so as science becomes ever more partisan and politicized and arrogant and condescending towards those that an increasing percentage of so called scientists and academics in the most prominent of today’s science disciplines regard as being inferior in intelligence, knowledge and status to themselves ?

    The GWPF site this morning has ten subject headings.
    Three of those headings are below;

    a / WHY THE PUBLIC SHOULD MISTRUST SCIENTISTS
    .
    b / Editor Sounds Alarm Over Falling Public Trust In Science
    .
    c / CAN SCIENCE BE SAVED FROM SELF-DESTRUCTION?

    50

  • #
    el gordo

    Somebody has been caught in the filter bot, fouling the thread.

    20

  • #
    Another Ian

    Re climate targets


    PiperPaul | August 23, 2016 3:10 PM | Reply

    ClimateChange™ is just a gigantic taxpayer-funded make-work program for people who want to feel important but who are actually incompetent. That explains everything.”

    Comment at

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2016/08/oh-shiny-pony-179.html#comments

    41

    • #
      Another Ian

      Wow! Another red thumb!

      Could it be that the above is descriptive of the occupation of “red-thumber”?

      30

    • #
      ROM

      Darn!
      The traitor!
      Send Lurch with its palsied red thumb back please as I’m light on a red thumb vote or two.

      30

  • #

    Joanne mentions this in the main body of her text:

    Could it be, I wonder, because countries that have nukes have already cut their emissions (they only start counting the reductions from 2005).

    This is the most relevant point here, because without those large scale nukes, the only way that Countries can get that level of huge constant reliable electrical power is with large scale coal fired power, hence their CO2 emissions would be considerably higher, and by a large margin, so already having those large scale Nuclear power plants, they have already reduced their emissions.

    An example in point here where records can actually be shown is the U.S. which has 18/19% of their power from Nukes, and it has been as high as 22%. Without those Nukes, the U.S. emissions would be humungously more than what they are or were, and there is currently no (acceptable) source of power to replace those levels of power, and EVERY renewable, (especially those two of choice, Wind and Solar) would be useless to even begin to replace it.

    Look at the chart at this link.

    Nuclear power is the yellow marker there and you can hover your mouse over the yellow markers to see how much power we are talking about, and that amount is around three and a half times the total Australian power generation from EVERY source.

    Below the chart is the list of sources, and it dates back to 1949.

    Keep in mind there has only been one or two new Nukes since the 80′s, so they have been huge suppliers for that long.

    From that chart and the list, you can see that Nukes have been supplying between 700 to 800TWH Plus every year since 1999, now 17 years, pretty much constantly. That works out to a Capacity Factor of between 85 and 89%, each and every year, and as Summer is considered the period of highest consumption, Nukes average between 90 and 93% during Summer. The only down time is carefully scheduled refuelling periods, one reactor at a time at the normal two reactor plant.

    85 to 89% year round average.

    Renewables can only dream of that with Wind averaging around 25 to 30% and Solar around 17 to 20%.

    Those Countries with Nukes have ALREADY had huge reductions in CO2 emissions, so the argument that Nukes are holding back renewables is a spurious argument, and anyway, they can’t replace those Nukes with renewables.

    Just like what is happening with coal fired power, those Nukes will be run into the ground, going unreplaced until the real truth comes out that there is just NO way to replace those Nukes and coal fired power, except with like power delivered for like power delivered and on the same constant basis.

    Tony.

    140

    • #
      RobK

      I agree, the warmistas have an issue with nuclear because it makes renewables redundant where there are distribution grids. The CO2 argument is scuttled (for what it’s worth). The only psycho bit is trying to masquerade expensive low energy density renewables for compact, economical high energy density baseload power. The psycho/political diatribe doesn’t make any sense.
      Nice article Jo, minor bit of pedantry:
      “about joules per megawatt hour” might read a bit easier if it was ” about joules or megawatt hours”

      10

  • #

    If Karl Popper were still alive, he would probably rate this paper as pseudoscience.

    Quote

    This led Popper to conclude that what were regarded as the remarkable strengths of psychoanalytical theories were actually their weaknesses. Psychoanalytical theories were crafted in a way that made them able to refute any criticism and to give an explanation for every possible form of human behaviour. The nature of such theories made it impossible for any criticism or experiment – even in principle – to show them to be false.[9] This realisation had an important consequence when Popper later tackled the problem of demarcation in the philosophy of science, as it led him to posit that the strength of a scientific theory lies in its both being susceptible to falsification, and not actually being falsified by criticism made of it. He considered that if a theory cannot, in principle, be falsified by criticism, it is not a scientific theory.[33]

    End of Quote

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

    60

  • #
    Eugene WR Gallun

    Jo

    With this article you and the commentators have brought sunshine into my life. You all have justly critiqued the antics of fools and exposed the babble of idiots. The world seems a better place to me and I go forth with a smile on my face.

    Eugene WR Gallun

    60

  • #

    Maybe us nuke enthusiasts aren’t authoritarians or fascists. Maybe we’re just lone wolves with a history of mental illness. If you get me.

    30

  • #
    pat

    ***jo, David Evans is named in this so-called “quiz”. read all:

    24 Aug: Tim Blair Blog: CULTURAL MINORITY THREATENED
    A delightful quiz from our friends in the Buzzfeed Community…
    Australia has some outstanding culture warriors fighting the good fight. You are definitely one of them – but which one? We’ve put together this quiz to celebrate the contributions of Australia’s most vocal minority, right-wing commentators, and to herald the launch of ***Kill Climate Deniers.
    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/cultural_minority_threatened/

    disclaimer: killclimatedeniers is a BuzzFeed user and their posts have not been vetted or endorsed by BuzzFeed’s editorial staff…etc

    24 Aug: Buzzfeed Community: Which Right-Wing Commentator Are You?

    1. What is your stance on the idea of anthropogenic climate change?…
    (opton) ‘A mathematical discovery by a Perth-based electrical engineer may change everything about the climate debate. If Dr Evans is correct, then he has proven the theory on carbon dioxide wrong.’ …
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/killclimatedeniers/which-right-wing-commentator-are-you-2jvox

    don’t know what to make of this.

    21

    • #
      Another Ian

      Pat #32

      “don’t know what to make of this.”

      Just in case remember that other saying

      “There’s less in this than meets the eye”

      20

  • #
    el gordo

    A bloomin’ cool winter in the UK may witness increased deaths from climate change.

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/more-problems-looming-for-the-grid/#comments

    10

  • #
    ROM

    The Barrier reef debacle merely reinforces my proposition that one half of the population is below the AVERAGE intelligence levels of the total population.

    As scientists come from exactly the same gene pool as the rest of us, we can assume that one half of “scientists” are below the average intelligence levels of the population.

    We can further assume based on the science being promulgated everywhere these days that the scientists who are of average intelligence or above that of the populace, work in physics, mathematics , medicine, geology and astronomy, electronics and many similar technical scientific pursuits.

    Those of below the average intelligence of the populace and going by the questionable quality of most of their scientific output, work in climate change research, data changing and data manipulation research if they are in climate science, psychological analysis of skeptics, environmental sciences such as reef research, flatulence research for cattle, carbon emissions papers writing [ no science qualifications neccessary for anything to do with the dreaded carbon! ] dead kangaroo research and etc.

    20