Meanwhile... http://vimeo.com/290 95881... take a look it'll kill you!

Germany will not run out of power they will simply build coal plants, which will actually kill people, unlike their nuclear plants.  Very green.

Something RT should pick up on http://www.dhs.gov/y news/releases/201205 02-napolitano-visit- to-new-zealand.shtm

The rats are leaving the sinking SS USA and want somewhere safe to escape to when SFP4 collapses.

Physician: There are homes in Chernobyl now with children so grossly deformed, we’ve never seen anything like it in the history of pediatrics — Cancer at 6 instead of 60, that’s what nuclear power means (VIDEO)

htt p://enenews.com/phys ician-homes-chernoby l-children-grossly-d eformed-weve-never-s eeen-anything-like-h istory-pediatrics-ca ncer-6-instead-60-nu clear-power-means-vi deo

Over the last 6 months a reactor in Europe has been leaking gases - particularly Iodine - which reached 30 micorSieverts per hour in Bucharest.
Radiat ion spikes are recorded all over Europe, and in Fukushima, the stillbirth rate is now 40%.
Oh yes, nuclear power is a great idea. So far the reactor fail rate for all reactors is something like 1.5-2.3 %.
Meltdowns here, there - and everywhere!
And for the UK viewers - lets not forget Windscale.

" Green Power " is a pipe dream, Wind Power is a monstrosity which makes money for some but is impractical because it requires too many back ups and spoils the scenery ,kills the birds and is an obtacle to ships , helicopters , the list is endless. The only real solution is well built over reinforced Nuclear Power stations , not forgetting expert well trained well educated operating staff .The French EDF has a fantastic safety record .The only other small scale alternatives are Coal fired power stations or Gas Turbines ( Jet Engines and of course stop the nonsensical boycott of Iran's oil which is an aberration )  After a life time of flying and travelling the World I am convinced that the Planet Earth is getting colder ; If the " Greens" and those who make money out of their " Doomsday Prophecies " do not like it ,prepare yourselves for enormous and devastating " Black Outs " ; Enjoy Them ! .

Pepe finds it odd that the two losers of WWII are the ones abandoning mature and safe (less the Fukushima Stuxnet attack) nuclear power with no plans on how to make up the difference other than importing more oil and gas.  Who's really calling the shots?  Meanwhile the maverick Iceland shows us how it can be done, and nobody pays attention.

It is so sad to see that so many people and governments are still under the influence of this "green" lobby which is anything but green. UK subsidises windfarms by £400 million per year as well as hefty bribes to landowners. This is to hush up the environmental damage that wind turbines cause.   In the US, one of the great ironies about wind energy is that the people you might expect to cheer for it most - wildlife conservationists who care about the planet - are its most vociferous critics. It's not hard to see why when you have a look at the statistics.The American Bird Concervancy estimates that wind turbines kill between 75,000 and 275,000 birds every year. And this is just a start. There are 14,000 abandoned wind turbines in the US polluting the environment. Out of these 4,500 are in California. The cost of removing these abandoned monstrocities is around $1000 each.  Greedy windindustrialists don't want to hear horror stories about turbines falling over, catching fire after being struck by lightning, lethal shards of ice being hurled from the blades, the nerve-racking low frequency noise (like a pulsing disco) and the disorientating strobe effect in sunlight which causes serious damage to human central nervous system. This is just collateral damage to them. Wind energy is not safe nor is it economically viable. It serves interests of a selected group of industrialists who make huge amounts of money from this which comes out of the taxpayers' pocket. I personally would rather live next door to a nuclear power station than a single wind turbine.

inatec wrote in #12MikeNZ wrote in #9lower to 110V wrote in #8instead of 220v or even 24v !******************* ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** *******Who's a silly American with no education or thought processes showing it off on RT for all to see?At lower voltages, resistive losses increase meaning thicker cables to carry the current, and more costs and inefficiencies.If you silly Yankees switched to 240V AC, you'd save the output of a nuclear plant on full power - or more.And you wonder why you are a bankrupt 3rd rate world power?-------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------H ere in Minnesota (USA) the voltage across my electrical mains in my house reads 220 volts AC at 60 cycles per second. It is divided into two copper busses that distribute 120 volts AC for the majority household circuits. There are a three 220 volts AC circuits that supply power to an electric stove, clothing dryer and a water pump. I was told sometime ago that if we could get away from 60 cycles per second and switch at a much higher frequency we could increase our energy efficiency many times more. Our electrical grid, like our narrow railroad gauge, was installed piecemeal many years ago using the best technology of the period, so for now we are stuck with what we have.

MikeNZ wrote in #9lower to 110V wrote in #8instead of 220v or even 24v !******************* ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** *******Who's a silly American with no education or thought processes showing it off on RT for all to see?At lower voltages, resistive losses increase meaning thicker cables to carry the current, and more costs and inefficiencies.If you silly Yankees switched to 240V AC, you'd save the output of a nuclear plant on full power - or more.And you wonder why you are a bankrupt 3rd rate world power?Here in Minnesota (USA) the voltage across my electrical mains in my house reads 220 volts AC at 60 cycles per second. It is divided into two copper busses that distribute 120 volts AC for the majority of household circuits. There are a three 220 volts AC circuits that supply power to an electric stove, clothing dryer and a water pump. I was told sometime ago that if we could get away from 60 cycles per second and switch at to a much higher frequency we could increase our energy efficiency many times more.  Our electrical grid, like our too narrow railroad gauge, was installed piecemeal many years ago using the best technology of the period, so for now we are stuck with what we have. Don

While that sounds nice, the reality is that few nations have built these plants - due to the huge costs. No one has completed the fuel cycle, and you haven't pointed out the delay or lag time in reprocessing Pu fuel assemblies, nor have you mentioned how much Pu is burnt. 90% ? Really? That's news to me!
Simple analysis of fission products in the common literature will confirm that your '300 year claim' is wrong - along with the theory - which is now being tested on the ground in Japan - and blows across the continental US - daily.

lower to 110V wrote in #8
instead of 220v or even 24v !
*********** ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** ******************** ***************Who's a silly American with no education or thought processes showing it off on RT for all to see?At lower voltages, resistive losses increase meaning thicker cables to carry the current, and more costs and inefficiencies.If you silly Yankees switched to 240V AC, you'd save the output of a nuclear plant on full power - or more.And you wonder why you are a bankrupt 3rd rate world power?

instead of 220v or even 24v !

A government turning its back on nuclear power is a crime against humanity.

@salparadise the alternate hypothesis, and I wonder whether some have ever seriously considered it, is that some statements are barking...

The Germans at least have the political willingness to steer a path away from nuclear energy. The comments from Ruth Lea about wind-power were silly. Progress is being made all of the time in shifting to renewable sources of energy, specifically those that don't rely on fossil fuels. The German's wouldn't embark on this without first knowing the next step to take. 

The future for European energy is when the enormous project known as the super grid is completed. This can transfer renewable energy from the Meditteranean to the Arctic. So all types of renewables to include wind , wave, tidal, solar geothermal, hydro and biomass can be used and transferred all over Europe via the super grid. That is the future with the eventual phasing out of fossil fuels.Europe will soon overtake the world in this field , leaving others stuck in the era of fossil fuels which are killing the planet.Also in France we are developing fusion energy which will also revolutionise power generation . Russia is also doing research in this field.The previous comments have been made unfortunately by people ignorant of  the incredible technological developments in Europe

Very soon the Germans will run many of the so called 'micro co-generating' plants, on the large amount of imported Russian g as. If they could do it 35 years ago, (I worked there) I am sure they can gear up for the task in a very short time. 

One country, with a long history of earthquakes and tsunamis, who recklessly built nuclear reactors on the caost, have been used as justification for countries who with no histroy of either to close down their power stations. It's madness.
What are they going to do in the winter?
We are, according to one source, heading towards years of colder weather and harder winters and these idiots want to turn the heating off.
Whilst I don't think we can continue to pollute the earth in the name of short term expediency, we can't get idealistic about this. Millions of lives depend on practical solutions.

Th e leaders of the EU are insane - insane economic policies, insane energy policies, insane immigration policies. And they just sit there, blinking stupidly like rabbits caught in the headlights of an oncoming truck.
They have no answer except to insist that if we trust them and allow them continue to demand and inmplement insane policies, that this will somehow lead to sanity.