Wrongly filed
You appear to have filed this in Bootnotes whereas clearly you meant to file it in DasBootnotes.
15 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Dec 2010
"What did your team achieve this week Mr. Cockshott?"
"On Monday I bet Dave in accounts he couldn't eat three tablespoons of coffee granules without being sick and then on Thursday I had my team nail shut all the fire doors and set fire to the reception desks. Next week I'm going on a FUD splatter rampage about GPS."
"Excellent have a bonus."
But ever less so:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2011/jul/11/coronation-street-drop-in-viewers
Still I'm sure some of the remaining 7.1M shuffling, boss-eyed soaptards will be queuing up, credit cards in hand, to pump cash into the ITV coffers. Unfortunately, given the intelligence level required to be entertained by this tardovision Dan Brownian Manc cockwash, the best they'll probably manage is to push their card into one of the ventilation slots on the side of their PC loosing it forever and dribble into the keyboard until the whole thing shorts out.
Still, it will keep them entertained in the advert breaks in Loose Women.
That's precisely why it is the least economic to blow off. The economics rely on maximising the utilisation of the plant to pay off those build costs. For a conventional plant the cost is mostly fuel so ramping down is fine.
There is also an argument from practicality that the flow of coolant through the reactor and therefore generation cannot be stauched as quickly as with conventional plant (where the heat source can be killed relatively quickly) as the reactor will continue to require cooling after shutdown and the condenser will not be designed to remove all heat from the outcoming steam without that steam having previously done work in the turbines.
Furthermore, ramping and blow off increases thermal cycles meaning decreased life of thermally stressed plant meaning in turn more servicing. Now servicing most parts of a conventional plant can be done by a man with a MIG set and a gas axe for a tenner an hour. Not really the case for a nuclear plant where you pay a man just to number the bolts you take out.
"The parties have agreed to work together to develop plans for the construction of a new Siemens offshore wind turbine manufacturing and export facility at the Port with the aim of executing definitive agreements in 2011."
The direct drive Siemens machines are pretty much uniquely offshore turbines. You cannot 'assemble' them on shore in any meaningful sense. This site may not produce every last element of the turbine but there are a great number of skilled jobs in the construction of the superstructure and equipment in these machines. Also the marginal saving on shipping cheaply manufactured parts half way around the world is not actually all that big and given recent history (http://www.offshore247.com/news/art.aspx?Id=14850) not well regarded in the industry.
In addition some of the sites that these turbines populate will be owned and operated from the uk meaning more jobs for offshore construction, maintenance, service techs and spare parts/offsite servicing.
I'm sure you are fully commensurate with the 'no real skills' required for a confined spaces trained specialist welder with an offshore ticket. Or an offshore trained turbine technician or site operator.
Still, I am sure if you copy your ill-formed opinion on to the the Daily Fail comments section it will get a few up votes just on the basis of your use of the words 'coolie country.'
I am being economically coerced into working in my job, this job has certain requirements which I dislike (regardless of the degree of unpleasantness) but I was aware of these when I took the job. I don't see how I can complain.
1. If I was forced to do my job it would be different.
2. If I was lied to about the role it would be different.
Back to prostitution:
In case 1. you do not address this by making prostitution illegal, there are arguments that this makes it worse as the whole industry is driven underground. Nor do you address it by making using trafficed prostitutes some sort of strict liability rape offence (a vaunted Labour initiative right up there with ending boom and bust in the all time fucking stupid stakes).
In case 2. if the prositute has not been physically forced to do the job they can leave (as I can in my job when they make me get in at 0830). If not, see point 1.
Whether or not prostitutes get 'fucked in the arse' is frankly irrelevant.
Probably the best way to do this would be to get insurers to base their risk assessment of a driver on his/her behaviour. Drive more safely, get cheaper insurance. Turns out the insurance companies think so too:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Auto-Insurers-Vehicle-Electronic-Tracking-Device-Can-Discount-Your-Car-Insurance-Premiums&id=344980
There has also been recent discussion about such a device in the uk. A chap I knew a few years ago was trialling one too.
Frankly the whole big brother thing sounds like a multi million IT fail waiting to happen.
anything which stops the BBC (and, in fairness, just about every other major media outlet) trawling the airport to find the most irrational, frothing at the mouth, plank imaginable and putting their ill-formed views on the Daily Mail section of the 10 o'clock news is to be applauded.
And clearly this is working as they appear to have been reduced to interviewing someone from Helsinki airport about how they never have problems with snow (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12042213). Nordic countries better capable of handling snow. Nice one BBC.
OT: Pretty stupid publicity fail there though.