New nuclear power plants in Britain

[repiV]

Watford Gap, surely? Otherwise, I'm up North right now, despite being 30 mins from London :O

No, I mean Watford.

You live in Hertfordshire?

Where I come from must be like the end of the Earth then :E

I reckon it's because you go 100 miles north of London and the weather turns to crap. People figured, why live here when I can chill out in Brighton?
Of course, back then, women didn't have the same freedom of movement and that explains why Brighton is so gay.

True, but it'd be nice if they made sure all new builds adhered to certain standards (like not being positioned on flood plains :E) and if they offered help in helping people insulate or improve their homes, even if it's just knocking the VAT off their bill.

Oh, definitely. I was mainly referring to his typical eco-nut smugness about people who choose to drive fast cars.
I ride fast bikes because I enjoy them, not because I think it makes me look good. I don't see what's particularly cool about tight leather or limping around on crutches.
He has no right to judge people for their hobbies and interests, or decide what is or is not an acceptable pastime. Might as well just let Hitler win. Not to mention that he does far more damage to the environment by taking one overseas holiday than I could ever do in a whole year's worth of riding. So does running a house.

 

[kirovman]

No, I mean Watford.

You live in Hertfordshire?

Nope, Essex.

I reckon it's because you go 100 miles north of London and the weather turns to crap. People figured, why live here when I can chill out in Brighton?
Of course, back then, women didn't have the same freedom of movement and that explains why Brighton is so gay.

Aye, it's like Mordor up in Northumberland where I'm from.

Oh, definitely. I was mainly referring to his typical eco-nut smugness about people who choose to drive fast cars.
I ride fast bikes because I enjoy them, not because I think it makes me look good. I don't see what's particularly cool about tight leather or limping around on crutches.
He has no right to judge people for their hobbies and interests, or decide what is or is not an acceptable pastime. Might as well just let Hitler win. Not to mention that he does far more damage to the environment by taking one overseas holiday than I could ever do in a whole year's worth of riding. So does running a house.

Yeah, I'm tired of governments and regulations that sap the fun out of life. They don't lead by example though, other than token gestures.

 

[-Psy-]

God. I hate people who proclaim that the south is better then the north and vice versa. Who gives a toss? Britain is a shit hole wherever you go.

 

[repiV]

Nope, Essex.

Ah, the land of great roads and loose women. I often take a trip down Saffron Walden/Finchingfield way.

Aye, it's like Mordor up in Northumberland where I'm from.

Yeah, I'm tired of governments and regulations that sap the fun out of life. They don't lead by example though, other than token gestures.

This government won't be happy until we all have our own entertainment schedule, precisely regimenting how we divide our evenings and weekends between television, sports deemed safe by the health and safety advisor and the pub.
The worst thing is that the prevailing attitude in this country seems to support this kind of nannying and sucking the fun out of life. It's horrifying.
Twenty years ago, pulling a wheelie was met with applause, excitement and admiration - these days you're more likely to get a disapproving shake of the head, even from fellow bikers. To me, that just sums up completely what's wrong with this country now. Everyone's a ****ing square with their nose in everyone else's business.
I was out with my friend a few months back, and we got pulled by the police because he was wearing jeans. Since when did this jumped up little twat's personal, clueless opinion on how we should live our lives give him a reason to interrupt our day?

 

[Angry Lawyer]

It's political correctness gone mad!

-Angry Lawyer

 

[jverne]

To me, anything north of Watford is up norf. Even though I'm only a few miles south of Watford. :E

Northamptonshire and Warwickshire are like the end of civilisation...and the small villages around Milton Keynes are like exploring the wilderness...



You can't tell people how to spend their money. You're not a dictator.

things need to become legitimized not legalized. your hobby is your hobby, but if you kill people for fun then the you have to be restricted.
you are already being told what to do, it's just that you don't realize it.

at least i'm not prohibiting ideas. i wouldn't prohibit anything i'd just make it insanely taxed and costly. fast vehicles don't belong on a public road. go on a race track and stop endangering others.

we don't live in an anarchy you know?!

 

[repiV]

things need to become legitimized not legalized. your hobby is your hobby, but if you kill people for fun then the you have to be restricted.
you are already being told what to do, it's just that you don't realize it.

That's an inane comparison - killing people for fun violates someone else's human rights. Driving a fast car does not, it's none of your damn business whatsoever what anyone else drives, so long as it's roadworthy.

at least i'm not prohibiting ideas. i wouldn't prohibit anything i'd just make it insanely taxed and costly. fast vehicles don't belong on a public road. go on a race track and stop endangering others.

Oh, so you're only nine tenths of a control freak. That must be OK then.
Newsflash for you: operating a motor vehicle already is insanely taxed and costly. You have to pay tax on the purchase, maintenance, insurance, road tax, fuel tax on top of the VAT on the petrol to start with - 80% of the cost of petrol is tax, parking charges, congestion charges, parking and speeding fines which are basically adminstered as taxes these days...noone gets raped by tax more than the motorist.
Also, if you think fast vehicles don't belong on a public road, you're a clueless idiot and have no business talking about what should or should not happen on the roads. Slow vehicles are much more inherently dangerous because they don't have the performance to get out of tight situations or overtake safely. They don't handle well and you certainly can't trust in the quality of the tyres or brakes. Fast vehicles only present a potential increased danger in the hands of incompetence, and even then they are usually safer because of the expensive safety features they have that cheaper vehicles do not.
The number of crashes that occur at high speed is insignificantly small - you should really learn what you're talking about before you run your mouth.

When people pull out on me at junctions, which is a regular occurence on a bike, I often have three choices - brake, accelerate like **** and get in front of him before he hits me, or swerve and nail the throttle and shoot up the other side of the road, moving back before I hit any oncoming traffic.
On a slow bike, I'd have only one of those choices - and the brakes would be nowhere near as powerful, and the tyres would not provide anywhere near as much grip for braking. Not to mention it's more difficult to see and hear, and people tend to bully smaller bikes. Riding a slow bike would have caused me to have at least one serious accident so far.

we don't live in an anarchy you know?!

Since when does the fact that we don't live in anarchy give arrogant, smug, self-righteous bastards like you the right to dictate how other people live their lives?
I hope you regret the mediocre, uninteresting, sissy life you obviously plan to lead. Some of us still have some of our human spirit left.

 

[jverne]

That's an inane comparison - killing people for fun violates someone else's human rights. Driving a fast car does not, it's none of your damn business whatsoever what anyone else drives, so long as it's roadworthy.



Oh, so you're only nine tenths of a control freak. That must be OK then.
Newsflash for you: operating a motor vehicle already is insanely taxed and costly. You have to pay tax on the purchase, maintenance, insurance, road tax, fuel tax on top of the VAT on the petrol to start with - 80% of the cost of petrol is tax, parking charges, congestion charges, parking and speeding fines which are basically adminstered as taxes these days...noone gets raped by tax more than the motorist.
Also, if you think fast vehicles don't belong on a public road, you're a clueless idiot and have no business talking about what should or should not happen on the roads. Slow vehicles are much more inherently dangerous because they don't have the performance to get out of tight situations or overtake safely. They don't handle well and you certainly can't trust in the quality of the tyres or brakes. Fast vehicles only present a potential increased danger in the hands of incompetence, and even then they are usually safer because of the expensive safety features they have that cheaper vehicles do not.
The number of crashes that occur at high speed is insignificantly small - you should really learn what you're talking about before you run your mouth.

When people pull out on me at junctions, which is a regular occurence on a bike, I often have three choices - brake, accelerate like **** and get in front of him before he hits me, or swerve and nail the throttle and shoot up the other side of the road, moving back before I hit any oncoming traffic.
On a slow bike, I'd have only one of those choices - and the brakes would be nowhere near as powerful, and the tyres would not provide anywhere near as much grip for braking. Not to mention it's more difficult to see and hear, and people tend to bully smaller bikes. Riding a slow bike would have caused me to have at least one serious accident so far.



Since when does the fact that we don't live in anarchy give arrogant, smug, self-righteous bastards like you the right to dictate how other people live their lives?
I hope you regret the mediocre, uninteresting, sissy life you obviously plan to lead. Some of us still have some of our human spirit left.

did i struck a nerve or something?

i'm all for freedom of choice, but some choices are just not feasible.
yes it's not really my business, but the faster and the heavier a vehicle is the more energy it has and the potential for disaster. fuel usage of big cars is higher especially in urban areas.

apparently a vehicle is not that expensive since so many people have them and the numbers are still increasing.


we've already discussed the issue about speed. both sides have good and bad parts. too many incompetent drivers are allowed to have fast, big and dangerous cars. don't shit me on bigger cars are safer...it all depends.
i wasn't exactly talking about safety but about energy consumption, in which you have no argument against.


i don't give a shit how you live your life as long as you don't ruin mine.
i have nothing to regret for now. i can do most things i like doing.

you think i enjoy being controlled or something? you obviously don't see the bigger picture.
and talking about self-righteousness, take a look in the mirror you fool. when it comes to selfishness you take the cake. at least i'm willing to negotiate and be open minded, but you sir, you are a good example how people shouldn't be.

 

[repiV]

did i struck a nerve or something?

Yes. You are a sterling example of the control freak mindset plaguing our society in recent years. You know what's right for everyone else, and think it's perfectly acceptable for you to enforce your flawed opinion on others.
You stand for everything that freedom isn't.

i'm all for freedom of choice, but some choices are just not feasible.
yes it's not really my business, but the faster and the heavier a vehicle is the more energy it has and the potential for disaster. fuel usage of big cars is higher especially in urban areas.

So many things wrong with what you're saying there I don't even know where to begin...
You can talk about the "potential for disaster" all you like, but the fact of the matter is, high speed accidents are extremely rare, and high speed accidents involving multiple vehicles are almost non-existant. Even the slowest modern cars can top 100mph anyway, so I don't see your point there either.
Furthermore, the kind of people who can afford high-performance cars are not generally skilled, experienced, sensible drivers. Even the biggest motorbikes weigh a fraction of a small car, so they're a non-issue. Generally speaking, the only person who gets hurt in a bike accident is the rider.
Even so, half of all motorcycle accidents happen on machines with an engine capacity of 125cc or lower - learner-legal bikes. 1000cc bikes and above have the lowest accident rate of all - these are 200mph machines which will catapult you off the seat if you use even a tiny fraction of the available throttle at an inappropriate moment. Upright on a straight dry road, you could still lose control by being too enthusiastic with the throttle. Yet somehow, this has no bearing on the accident figures.
The facts say that your theory is bullshit. Bad driving kills, not fast cars. The biggest menace on the roads by far are people who don't pay attention to the road. Less than 5% of all accidents have excessive speed as even a contributory factor. You couldn't be further away from reality if you tried.

No shit, bigger cars use more fuel. What's your point?

apparently a vehicle is not that expensive since so many people have them and the numbers are still increasing.

People drive because they have to drive. There isn't really a choice in the matter for most people. The repercussions are that it becomes more and more expensive to even exist. Anti-vehicle policies keep more people in poverty - not only from the cost of running a car, but because the logistics industry becomes more expensive too and the cost of all transported goods is passed on to the consumer.
Almost all my spare money goes on my bike - at least, it did before I shattered my leg. I don't even have a particularly fancy bike - but keeping a vehicle is just a never-ending cycle of cost after cost after cost. A car is more expensive still.

we've already discussed the issue about speed. both sides have good and bad parts. too many incompetent drivers are allowed to have fast, big and dangerous cars. don't shit me on bigger cars are safer...it all depends.

I never said bigger cars are safer, I said high-performance cars are safer. Physically large cars are more often than not driven by stupid, inattentive morons and it's usually those who cause me danger. But only an idiot would take from that that bigger cars should be banned - the idiots would drive something else.
Frankly, I think anyone who drives a car and whines about the dangers of driving is a complete and utter pussy. You're about 50 times less likely to die than I am, and most drivers never pick up a serious injury from driving in an entire lifetime. The danger is so microscopic, especially if you devote time and effort to actually learning how to be a good driver (and I mean studying and practising the craft, not obeying the law), that it makes me really, really wonder what the hell happened to the human race when people think driving is too dangerous.
Did everyone in this country lose their spine?

i wasn't exactly talking about safety but about energy consumption, in which you have no argument against.

What? I don't give a shit whether a bigger cars uses more energy or not. It's none of your business.
Furthermore, your "principles" are deeply flawed. Someone who owns a Lamborghini and takes it out 10 times a year will be burning far less fuel than someone who owns a VW Golf and drives 80,000 miles a year - but your idiotic ideas wouldn't recognise that distinction.
Likewise, someone who exchanges their fuel-efficient car for a new fuel-efficient car on a yearly basis will be doing far more damage to the environment than someone who drives the same supercar year after year.
And the effect of motor vehicles on the environment pales in comparison to most other things anyway - manufacturing, heating/powering a home, air travel...vehicles account for only 2% of all emissions in the UK. It's completely insignificant.
A single round trip flight to Australia is more polluting than an entire year's worth of normal living for the average person in the UK. So save your tired, misinformed, kneejerk anti-car bullshit. It's just as stupid and ignorant as the right-wing reactionaries in America.

i don't give a shit how you live your life as long as you don't ruin mine.
i have nothing to regret for now. i can do most things i like doing.

Then shut up telling me what I should and should not drive.

you think i enjoy being controlled or something? you obviously don't see the bigger picture.

You're incredibly naive.

and talking about self-righteousness, take a look in the mirror you fool. when it comes to selfishness you take the cake. at least i'm willing to negotiate and be open minded, but you sir, you are a good example how people shouldn't be.

What? I'm selfish because I want to live my own life without authoritarian sons of bitches telling me what I can and cannot do?
You're the fool. First they came for the Jews...

 

[bbson john]

Wow, a step in the right direction, and a huge surprise considering how very strong the anti-science current in the UK is at the moment.

-Angry Lawyer

Anti-science, and anti-intellectualism.

 

[jverne]

Yes. You are a sterling example of the control freak mindset plaguing our society in recent years. You know what's right for everyone else, and think it's perfectly acceptable for you to enforce your flawed opinion on others.
You stand for everything that freedom isn't.



So many things wrong with what you're saying there I don't even know where to begin...
You can talk about the "potential for disaster" all you like, but the fact of the matter is, high speed accidents are extremely rare, and high speed accidents involving multiple vehicles are almost non-existant. Even the slowest modern cars can top 100mph anyway, so I don't see your point there either.
Furthermore, the kind of people who can afford high-performance cars are not generally skilled, experienced, sensible drivers. Even the biggest motorbikes weigh a fraction of a small car, so they're a non-issue. Generally speaking, the only person who gets hurt in a bike accident is the rider.
Even so, half of all motorcycle accidents happen on machines with an engine capacity of 125cc or lower - learner-legal bikes. 1000cc bikes and above have the lowest accident rate of all - these are 200mph machines which will catapult you off the seat if you use even a tiny fraction of the available throttle at an inappropriate moment. Upright on a straight dry road, you could still lose control by being too enthusiastic with the throttle. Yet somehow, this has no bearing on the accident figures.
The facts say that your theory is bullshit. Bad driving kills, not fast cars. The biggest menace on the roads by far are people who don't pay attention to the road. Less than 5% of all accidents have excessive speed as even a contributory factor. You couldn't be further away from reality if you tried.

No shit, bigger cars use more fuel. What's your point?



People drive because they have to drive. There isn't really a choice in the matter for most people. The repercussions are that it becomes more and more expensive to even exist. Anti-vehicle policies keep more people in poverty - not only from the cost of running a car, but because the logistics industry becomes more expensive too and the cost of all transported goods is passed on to the consumer.
Almost all my spare money goes on my bike - at least, it did before I shattered my leg. I don't even have a particularly fancy bike - but keeping a vehicle is just a never-ending cycle of cost after cost after cost. A car is more expensive still.



I never said bigger cars are safer, I said high-performance cars are safer. Physically large cars are more often than not driven by stupid, inattentive morons and it's usually those who cause me danger. But only an idiot would take from that that bigger cars should be banned - the idiots would drive something else.
Frankly, I think anyone who drives a car and whines about the dangers of driving is a complete and utter pussy. You're about 50 times less likely to die than I am, and most drivers never pick up a serious injury from driving in an entire lifetime. The danger is so microscopic, especially if you devote time and effort to actually learning how to be a good driver (and I mean studying and practising the craft, not obeying the law), that it makes me really, really wonder what the hell happened to the human race when people think driving is too dangerous.
Did everyone in this country lose their spine?



What? I don't give a shit whether a bigger cars uses more energy or not. It's none of your business.
Furthermore, your "principles" are deeply flawed. Someone who owns a Lamborghini and takes it out 10 times a year will be burning far less fuel than someone who owns a VW Golf and drives 80,000 miles a year - but your idiotic ideas wouldn't recognise that distinction.
Likewise, someone who exchanges their fuel-efficient car for a new fuel-efficient car on a yearly basis will be doing far more damage to the environment than someone who drives the same supercar year after year.
And the effect of motor vehicles on the environment pales in comparison to most other things anyway - manufacturing, heating/powering a home, air travel...vehicles account for only 2% of all emissions in the UK. It's completely insignificant.
A single round trip flight to Australia is more polluting than an entire year's worth of normal living for the average person in the UK. So save your tired, misinformed, kneejerk anti-car bullshit. It's just as stupid and ignorant as the right-wing reactionaries in America.



Then shut up telling me what I should and should not drive.



You're incredibly naive.



What? I'm selfish because I want to live my own life without authoritarian sons of bitches telling me what I can and cannot do?
You're the fool. First they came for the Jews...

don't put words in my mouth. there should be a consensus on what should be illegal or not. i'g go for something less, would you?
control freak? i wasn't talking about criminalizing thoughts or something. i was talking about energy conservation which apparently you don't give a shit about and wouldn't move an inch from your standpoint.

look...about the safety issue, i don't know that much to argue with you. you obviously done more research than me and know better. and i'm partially agreeing with you. but speed should have certain limitations. (dense public areas, unpredictable situations) and i'm not talking about roadsigns. why the hell did you even raise this issue?

i'm not talking about Lamborghini, but cars above 1.6ccm, which are really pointless for day to day use, especially in cities.

Total greenhouse gas emissions from all forms of road transport amounted to 125.3 million tonnes in
2002, an increase of 13 per cent since 1990. Greenhouse gas emissions from road transport now
constitute 18 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions compared with 14 per cent in 1990.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_environment/transport_report.pdf

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=901

don't just say they are insignificant. they keep on rising.
i'm not anti-car, but what the US is/was doing couldn't be called rational.


live your own life...i guess you'd go head on trough a brick wall to have it your way, wouldn't you?

and stop calling me authoritarian, i'd never do something if there is not a consensus about it! but yes i get it...you don't budge

 

[nurizeko]

God. I hate people who proclaim that the south is better then the north and vice versa. Who gives a toss? Britain is a shit hole wherever you go.

Aberdeen, and surrounding region, Scotland.

http://www.high.st/aberdeen/Aberdeen_high_street.jpeg

http://www.igreens.org.uk/aberdeen_bridge_of_dee.JPG

http://www.giffordlectures.org/aberdeen.jpg

http://www.aberdeencityandshire.com/web/MultimediaFiles/LIV_BALMEDIE_BEACH_2.JPG

http://www.goodbeachguide.co.uk/beach_images/scot/balmedie.gif

http://www.themilton.co.uk/images/pic-deeside03.jpg

http://lh3.google.com/arkadelt/RyRqC2vDKoI/AAAAAAAABc8/24WAXAQ9ffc/HPIM1023.JPG?imgmax=512

http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/aboyne/aboyne/images/hotelx.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/jojogoob/Dunn1.jpg

http://lh6.google.com/alexmidd/RtCSW8K22yI/AAAAAAAAAbI/4HPCFFPpSrI/P1030807.JPG?imgmax=512

http://www.pandjphotographyandart.co.uk/riverdeemorven.jpg

http://guide.visitscotland.com/vs/images/RGN/5/RGN405vs/ballater_16854.jpg

http://images.google.com/url?q=http...ar.jpg&usg=AFQjCNGE3ENY-3BWmpmd6Kg7igW7fxmjrQ

http://www.durhammountainsports.org.uk/images/gallery/braemar 006.jpg

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/64/82/22568264.jpg

http://www.airport-parking-shop.co.uk/images/aberdeen.jpg


And these only begin to do my home justice.

I am quite glad most southerners are so up their own arses they think up north is a blasted wasteland.

It means they'll never come here in droves buying up holiday homes and generally being irritating.

let them go buy their tacky Spanish Villa's and live in their completely manicured Disneyland suburban estates and their inner city urban sprawls. I'll take wide, open lands full of character, history and beauty any day.

For someone who lives on the utter edge of human inhabitation, I don't envy Londoners one iota.

Oh and thanks to global warming (thankyou dirty polluting londoners!) our summers are quite nice!, or should I say nicer.

And we get a nice midnight blue glow during summer, thats great for me because frankly the utter pitch blackness of a southern night bothers me something rotten.


In all seriousness, the UK is not as big a shithole as some pessimistic self loathers with desires to be French would think, and neither is there honestly that massive a north/south divide, and I would hope that, in this day and age, most folk when they proclaim "up north" a frigid ice packed waste, are just poking fun, as we do to the southern fairies.