Posts by Intractable Potsherd

Oxfordshire cops switch speed cameras back on

Nice one, AC...

I wish I could give more than one up-vote.

@Nick 65

"Now to drive home and annoy the crap out of everybody by doing 29mph through the villages. I bet the line of cars behind me gets to be longer than I can see in my mirror."

I came across someone worse than that in a black Ford Focus between Bala and Wrexham yesterday The one that seriously believed that he was driving safely by not going faster than 40mph on a road in good condition and in fine weather, and slowed down for every corner and *uphill* section and slowed down without erratically without using brakes in between. The one that tried to cut me off by crossing the white line when I overtook quite safely, at less than the posted limit of 60mph. The one with a queue of eighteen cars behind him that he clearly did not give a fuck about. The one that my wife says pointed at the speed camera sign on the road and suggested that I was crazy. The one that did not pull over to let others go about their business in their own way. The one that, in short, was driving at least without due care and attention, and at times dangerously (deliberately driving into the path of an overtaking car).

He is the one that should be in for driver retraining, not the ones doing a bit more than the speed limit.

Antarctic ice breakup makes ocean absorb more CO₂

@ James Micallef

You may not take note of this, because by your criteria I am not a rational being (I don't see warming when I look at the evidence, nor do I see any evidence that human activity is more significant than ant activity), but I agree with the thrust of your argument, as long as by "using non-carbon sources" you mean "using more nuclear because it is the only way of producing reliable electricity". Certainly phase out the coal/gas/oil power stations, but replace them with nuclear generators of the new generation (LFTR/pebble bed reactors), which can produce sufficient energy density to actually keep us at the technological level we are extremely lucky to live in, and spread it to the rest of the world.

Solar/wind/wave is never going to do that, though they might take some of the load off the generators, and allow for some energy independence at the consumer level.

But, indulis ...

... hostile climate states, since they have happened before, will probably happen again. There is absolutely nothing we or anyone else can do about it. There clearly is a way that the rate of change to hostile climate state can be altered (say, huge lump of rock from space coincides with our orbit, or big volcano gets indigestion), but it is going to happen sooner or later.

Technology is the way forward - we need to be able to mitigate the effects of these changes, not piss about trying to "reverse" them. Being prepared to deal with *any* change is better than worrying about a specific change. The recent events in Japan have shown the difference - you couldn't reverse the changes (stop the earthquake/tsunami combination, but the effects were very well mitigated due to sensible application of technology). Unless and until better means of electricity generation (the absolute core of the technological revolution) than nuclear/gas/coal come on line to keep our levels of technology at the level that saves lives that would otherwise be lost (and yes, dreadful as the death toll is in Japan, it could have been *much* worse), we should not be turning away from them. Going back to a pre-20th Century life-style is going to help no-one.

Also, I'm more worried about global cooling, and we are definitely not going thrive without electricity if that happens.

OK ...

... CO2 does not cause global warming. Now have your self-contradictory glee.

Lindsay Lohan ditches her surname

Surely...

... Largely Inebriated Newspage Dares *Send* Aeroplanes/Aircraft Yonder (yep, spelling pedant on flying things).

Your census data will be kept secret - except from MI5, police, courts etc

I am soooo tired ...

... of the "genealogists need this data" argument. We should not be making decisions based on making things easy for some sad hobbyist in the future.

I didn't realise ...

...that we were in the EC in 1920 (see the Census Act 1920).

All the data ...

... could be anonymous if it is for planning purposes. Names not needed.

Genealogy is irrelevant to anything except having something to bore you rapidly reducing number of friends.

Radioactive Tokyo tapwater HARMS BABIES ... if drunk for a year

@asdf ...you are right

I would not live near any of the nuclear plants in the UK (or most other places), because I have a real problem with flooding. I don't ever want to be flooded again, and will not live anywhere but up a big hill (I'm absolutely serious about this - I lived in a house near where the cellar was very close to the water table before I realised that it was a silly thing to do). The relevance? Nuclear plants tend to be built very close to lots of water, which means that they are on locally low-lying ground. However, build one up a hill and I would not have any problems at all. Of all the things to worry about in this world, radiation from nuclear plants doesn't even count.

Risks to health ...

... are far more likely to come from pollutants as a result of the tsunami. The mud alone will be horrendous, and now full of all sorts of decaying matter. Lots of industrial nasties will be all over the place. I'd be far more worried about those,

@ Methusalah

Lots of people seem to be avoiding the question. I'll answer it - yes, I would. The reasons for this are:

1. The risk of the child dying of dehydration is a certainty if I don't give it appropriate fluid intake, and if water is all I've got, I'll do it.

2. The actual risk of *any* harm to the child is very, very, very small over an entire lifetime.

3. If I still have a baby alive in the affected area after all the other things that have happened, radiation is so far down my list of priorities that it does not even register on the "Who gives a toss" meter.

But then, I'm intelligent, educated, and can spot an actual, real risk.

BT, TalkTalk in court seeking axe for Digital Economy Act

@ the very silly AC, 12:23

A business model that competes with freeloaders? OK, I accept the challenge:

1. Free "try before you buy": time limited files that allow the potential buyer to see if they like what they are interested in. Follow-through can be enhanced by offering discounted rates for buying within a certain time.

2. Costs: significantly lower (and I mean *significantly*) than buying the same thing on physical media. There is no reason for the downloaded files of a single CD to cost the same as as the CD itself - think about it, and you'll see why.

3. No restrictions - once it is bought, it is the buyer's to do with as they like, within the law. Yes, it is a risk, but letting people do what they want with stuff they have spent their money on is key to this argument.

OK, this is no challenge, really - these ideas have been floating around for years. What is needed is acceptance by the big media companies that some executives are going to be out of a job, and that those that remain might have to have fewer flashy toys, but that is the nature of a technology revolution. Everyone else has to learn to live with it, and there is no reason why the true leeches - those that live at the expense of people actually doing the creating - shouldn't have to as well.

@ The Big Yin

Upvote because I agree with you, but sometimes people can do the right thing for the wrong reasons. Whether it is simply costs that are their motivator or not, let's hope they win!

NHS to share foreigners' data with border agency

Reality disconnect

'Health minister Anne Milton said: "The NHS has a duty to anyone whose life or long-term health is at immediate risk, but we cannot afford to become an international health service, providing free treatment for all...' She later went on to say "However, we are an international military service, providing free death and serious injury to all."

If we stopped getting involved in other people's conflicts, and concentrated on defence of the country, we wouldn't need to be making odious decisions like this. How much has been spent on the new front: cruise missiles don't come cheap, for instance. The health service could have been very adequately funded for years on the amount that has been spent in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya.

It is well past time to get our priorities right.

Saab-spotter blogger poached by the company

I wonder ...

... what an Austin Martin would be like. It sounds like an even more boring version of the Allegro!

@Rune Moberg

It seems you are right about all that (having done a bit of checking), but someone did a poor job of quashing the belief that Saabs were to Vectras what Jaguar X-types were to Mondeos. I'm a car enthusiast through and through, and a rally fan, but even I was under the impression that Saabs from the GM era were just badge-engineered rep-wagons.

I'd suggest that this is one of the things that Saab need to deal with quickly if they are to be reunited with their core market of people that like fast, interesting cars (along with making sure that routine spare parts are not silly expensive).

Fukushima one week on: Situation 'stable', says IAEA

Apart from the fact ...

... that tourists would be getting in the way of dealing with an ongoing incident, and the Japanese * are going to have more than enough disaster tourists taking up their resources, I'd be more than happy to do that.

What exactly do you consider to be the problem?

If we all did that ...

... he'd be too incapable to write for weeks (and that would be a bad thing).

Thanks, Andydaws...

... great comment. I was working through ways to get to the cooling ponds last night, and had come to the same conclusion as you - this is an ideal job for a robot.

But ...

...the doom-panderers could never have been "right" in this instance. There has been nothing but shameful cynicism and willful ignorance on the part of most major news outlets. They have acted disgracefully, and dragged journalism down to levels of politicians and ACSLaw.

The propaganda is working.

People have clearly forgotten already that the key issue here is that there was one of the worst earthquakes in human history, followed by an inundation that would have made earlier people start writing about gods wiping the earth clean.

Just to recap - there was a huge earthquake and tsunami that caused the Daiitchi powerplant to have serious cooling problems. As a result of the earthquake/tsunami combo, the surrounding infrastructure was so badly damaged that roads, railways, powerlines, gaspipes etc no longer actually exist in a recognisable form. The fact that electrical supplies have been restored this soon after the catastrophe, with aftershocks so big that they would usually class as major earthquakes, must be a huge, dramatic story in its own right. Lets face it, there are still places affected by Hurricane Katrina that aren't yet fixed.

How dare you, Gk.pm, belittle the true heroism of the people that have worked to get things to this state. You clearly have no idea of the devastation that has been caused, nor the level of selfless heroism that the construction crews have demonstrated. You should be utterly ashamed of yourself.

@AC

Fuck off - seriously, just fuck right off.

(OK, Ms Bee - I'll understand if this gets lost in moderation, but it is really the way I feel for this utterly wrongheaded attack on Lewis after his work this week)

Fukushima on Thursday: Prospects starting to look good

Triumph ...

... no deaths due to radiation, no long-lasting damage to land, four reactors all in one, albeit very second-hand, piece. All this following one of the worst earthquakes in recorder history and a tsunami that would have been unbelievable if it had been seen in a movie. Add in the possibility that this happened at the worst possible time, i.e. just after one of the reactors had been de-fuelled for maintenance, and the possibility that there may have been some corner-cutting with the back-up systems, and this is a serious, never-to-be-forgotten triumph.

Failure - well, you know what failure would have been. Don't be silly.

Thanks, AC ...

... that was an inspired post!

<-- you probably need one of these now.

@ Fred Goldstein ...

... what on earth do kitchen tools have to do with this? Lewis has not once over-simplified the difficulties being faced with once this unprecedented crisis is over. However, he has countered the ignorance being spouted elsewhere, including by American "specialists". If you wish to call that denial, then fine, and I shall wear the badge with pride.

Fukushima situation as of Wednesday

So...

... how is this worse than those who think thousands died? To be honest (and I'm happy to regarded as callous), 200-300 deaths is actually not that bad, and demonstrates that the anti-nuclear lobby is just plain hysterical.

But...

... no-one has ever suggested that no lessons should be learned. Of course they should, but that doesn't mean that nuclear should be abandoned.

Seriously ...

... I don't think the workers would want it. They are simply doing their duty - they probably do not want individual recognition or praise.

Yessss...

...and the CIA were responsible for the Twin Towers incident.

Or maybe...

... it got damaged by the real problem here - earthquake and tsunami. Or maybe it just isn't possible to get the boron from the store to the place it is needed - transport links are badly affected.

My father was a fire officer...

...he risked his life and health many times to stop things getting worse (my mother still has the commendation for one particular example of him doing his duty). Are you suggesting that he shouldn't have done that, or that each and every time he (and, of course, all other fire officers) should have this type of coverage each time they need to do something they accept as a risk of the job? I can assure you, he would not have wanted that, nor would the others.

The workers at the power station have my respect, but I do not think they want your pity - they are doing their duty, and that is enough for them.

Perhaps it means ...

... "has some idea what the word "duty" means, and how it motivates people to get on and do a job for the greater good at the risk of one's own life".

Yes, but...

... x percent of a very small number is still a very small number. Thyroid cancer is quite rare, and so a 50-fold increase might still only be very small (from 1 a year to 50 a year on average, for instance). OK, it does depend on whether you count 50 cases a year of something eminently treatable as being serious, but the point remains the same.

@ Hermes...

... when I go out on rallies, I am expected to wear a minimum level of safety equipment. Thus, by your argument, fireproof clothes and helmets prove that there is a clear and present danger. To the contrary, I am in no immediate danger of harm, but the safety equipment is mandated just in case something does go wrong. It also helps one to focus on the risks that might occur.

And while we are talking about harm...

... when was the last time anyone saw an estimate if how many people would have died or suffered other harm if the products of modern technology didn't exist? The answer is probably "never". The number of people in Japan that owe their lives to this power station alone will run into at least hundreds of thousands. Just to take a single example, there will be thousands of people alive today because the hospitals had power to do emergency surgical operations, keep ITUs going, keep blood stored at the right temperature, power dialysis machines etc, etc. Each life saved is one up to the power plant.

This equation works for fossil fuels, too - there is never going to be anything so bad that it outweighs the benefits in pure health terms that have come from their use.

For the "Frothinggreenies"* out there - just how many lives would be lost through going to inefficient, contingent green technologies? Will it be more or less than maintaining "always-on" power generation? And, finally, if you still want to move to contingent power generation (i.e. it is generated *if* something else is happening (sufficiently windy/sunny), are you going to work in hospitals telling people that their loved ones died because we needed to move to "safer" technology?

Because, "amanfromearth"...

... in this context, a single life is irrelevant. Thousands are already dead, thousands more may already be dead, and the death toll from the bad weather in Japan could well add hundreds more. Seriously, the one man that died at the power station just fades into the background.

In all honesty, death is only relevant to those directly affected by it. I mourn for my loss when someone I know dies. I do not mourn for those I do not know, because it does not affect me.

It's easy...

... believe the calm one saying "there is no problem that can't be dealt with". No-one with any sense follows a headless chicken, which is what the doom-mongers are.

Mozilla to ship Firefox 4 on 22 March

Even more germane ...

... when are they making it available to XP users, who still make up a significant percentage of all Windows users?

Nah, really, I don't care. Firefox, Opera, and Chrome (in that order) make anything Microsoft can come up with utterly superfluous from my point of view.

Fukushima reactor shell ruptured?

Stupid or devious?

Whilst I am quite a long way down the scale towards Lewis Page's point of view, I have to agree that the lack of anything approaching information coming out from the company is either a) terrible public relations, in that they aren't doing any, or b) a sign that there is some arse-covering going on at the top, probably to do with management decisions regarding the maintenance of the backup systems and availability of relevant materials.

Doesn't anyone have the authority to send external observers in, and if not, why not?

Fukushima update: No chance cooling fuel can breach vessels

Yes...

...because Lewis is actually capable of affecting events on the other side of the world by merely writing about them.

Superstition isn't going to help us here, Paul.

@ Steven

I don't think I've read anything on here that has suggested that we should blithely stick nuclear power plants everywhere without a) learning where improvements can be made, and b) doing the risk assessments that are required by law in most countries (and before you ask, I did read Lewis's "triumphalist" article).

I'm not sure what you are getting at, really. What has been shown is that a 40 year old design of reactor has at least met its design brief, and probably exceeded it. There have obviously been some problems with the backups (or we wouldn't be discussing this), and it is clear that, with hindsight, there were some assumptions made that were not safe. Again with hindsight, it is clear that some of these assumptions could have had a significant safety margin built in relatively inexpensively (e.g. putting the backup pumps and power supplies higher than the reactor).*

The cost of dealing with the the damage caused by the earthquake and mere water (broadly defined, and not merely economic) are going to make the nuclear power station decommissioning/repairs look trivial. We will probably never see the costs (again, broadly defined) of dealing with the burning refinery,** but they will be as important to risk assessment as anything that has happened at Fukushima.

*However, I understand that this is irrelevant in modern reactor designs, since the water supply is gravity fed, with power needed to get the water out, not to put it in. Risk assessment was clearly performed long before this particular incident.

** Has anyone seen a casualty list from the refinery or around it? I'm not saying it isn't there somewhere, but it isn't all over the news.

@ Highlander ...

... very good analysis of the relative risks, thank you (though I haven't bought into the "CO2 is a dangerous substance in the quantities found in the atmosphere" bit).

Actually, AC 15:29 ...

... I have been thinking about it. The major stoppers are that it is an essentially lawless area,* which is a major downside (I wouldn't go to Somalia, Afghanistan, or even Panama for much the same reason), and, as far as I know, you need special permission to enter the area. The "radiation risk" does not even enter enter into it when I consider reasons not to go.

* I have a problem - I love places where there are few people, especially those areas that were built-up previously, but I am not the right type to be able to cope with the numbers of people living outside the rule of law.

Getting most of my news ...

... from Al Jazeera theses days. There is spin, but they aren't as strident, and don't seem to have strayed so far from the path that their moral compass is useless.

To add to Loyal Commenter ...

"In the meantime, 10000 people are declared missing or dead in the area from the effects of the tsunami, oil refineries are still burning (AFAIK), releasing unpleasant organic pollutants into the environment...", and now the weather is getting colder, with snow and freezing temperatures expected (see e.g. http://english.aljazeera.net/weather/2011/03/201131411569226380.html). That is going to account for more lives over the next few days, probably more than will *ever* be attributable to the Fukushima events.

A sense of proportion would be useful amongst the nuclear worry-warts.

Welsh baby-kisser's tweet sets him back £53k

Both correct.

Both the OP and the first AC reply are correct. The system desperately needs overhauling to get some proportionality into costs. There are so many lawyers being produced every year that, if there was an unprotected system and the laws of supply and demand were in operation, the f***kers would be barely able to command the same amount as a shelf-stacker in Tesco. Indeed, there have been moves to deregulate the legal system through legislation, but it never seems to get through - no prizes for guessing why (hint: which profession is VERY well represented in both Houses?).

Defamation law in this country still revolves around a wholly outdated concept of "inpugned honour", and should have been overhauled years ago, but it makes lots of money for very influential lawyers. Good on the folks who are seemingly getting the lawmakers to bring this stupid law into the 21st Century (well, 20th, anyway).

Fukushima reactor core battle continues

The real problem ...

... as with so many (and not just in Japan) is the arrogance of the government. There should have been a request for help days ago - that must have been clear to almost everyone. If, as I seem to be hearing, the key to preventing the escalation of the problem from "loss of emergency cooling" to "we're going to have a meltdown" (which I know doesn't have the apocalyptic meaning some would ascribe to it, but which is *very* bad PR), was "we need some pumps with power plants and some fuel", then that request should have been made early. Indeed, as I understand it, the request was made by the people on the ground, but someone in a ministry somewhere reversed it.

Once this is all over, it would be good to see a proper investigation so that heads can roll - and I doubt that many at the real-work end will be found wanting.

Sixth Japanese nuclear reactor loses cooling

@AC small nuclear plants

I'd love to - where do I sign up?

Japanese nuke meltdown may be underway

Yes!

Why not - the safety keeps working in a controlled fashion, even though it is 40 years old. Nothing has made me reconsider the rational course of action, which is to invest in the latest reactors as soon as possible.

However, the rational are going to have to deal with the irrationally fearful, as demonstrated by Elmer Phud's comment.