Jump to content
BANGKOK 24 May 2019 02:01

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

webfact

Public acceptance in nuclear power is key to building such plants in Thailand

Recommended Posts

Some of the best comments about nuclear power here was from a western educated Thai businesswoman who was dead against it until corruption was under control.

She highlighted how sub-standard materials and workmanship would apply and corners cut in order to maximise profits plus bribes changing hands to get contracts and of course to officialdom to sign off on a dangerous project completed with little regard for the original specs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's the trade off, they just better hope that China don't decide to compete with Thailand in buying electricity from Laos or to build more dams upstream and slowing water flow downstream into the Laos hydroelectic dams.

A battle for water will really get ugly.

Building a hydro dam upstream has very little, if any, effect on a dam downstream. The volume of water is exactly the same, perhaps a little cooler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking of the unfortunate happenings around 3 nuclear meltdowns - lets ban motor vehicles. Thousands more are killed by them than nuclear disasters. Guns kill many people also. And what about knives? Animals kill people. Should we eliminate them? And taking it to the ridiculously extreme - people kill people!

I raced cars and motorcycles for many years (as have done thousands of others) and having had a couple of accidents with both I survived fully intact. Some may question my mentality since (hah hah) but I undertook all the safety precautions available and survived. There are risks to living. Learn to recognise, control and minimise the risks and this applies to nuclear power plants also coffee1.gif

That is a good point for you knew the risks and were able to manage the danger. Unfortunately the nuclear waste problem is still sitting above ground in most cases or has the occasional leak below ground (suppose to be able to store the waste for 10s of thousands of years but less than 5/20 years stuff starts leaking in some cases)..

People who believe the old style reactors are safe and efficient have bought into the fairy tale so governments can make bombs.

If Iran needs nuclear power fine have them build Thorium reactors.. No bombs and can even make synthetic fuels ... Oops no one in the defense industry of Iran (and many others) want to hear that I assure you..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear residents of Krabi,

after reading your submissions against a coal fired power station, I have decided to kill two birds with one stone. My plan is to buy an about to be de-commissioned Russian nuclear sub, refurbish it with a coat of paint and moor it at Krabi pier. Its reactor will be used to power a steam turbine generator set mounted on the pier and connected to the grid. Not only will it supply ample energy, we will promote it as a tourist attraction, and if conflict should arise, it can be uncoupled and used to defend the nation.

Yours, P

What a top idea, the other two subs could be moored in the Chao Prayor to provide Bangkok with power and at low peak times they could go out and patrol the Gulf of Siam! And all for the all up price of 35 billion, what deal!! clap2.gifclap2.gifclap2.gifgigglem.gifwai.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the best comments about nuclear power here was from a western educated Thai businesswoman who was dead against it until corruption was under control.

She highlighted how sub-standard materials and workmanship would apply and corners cut in order to maximise profits plus bribes changing hands to get contracts and of course to officialdom to sign off on a dangerous project completed with little regard for the original specs.

Which is a very good point to make. Corruption, is endemic to Thailand and who's to blame? That would be an interesting discussion though I think the answer is obvious.

On the nuclear reactor issue, someone noted that more people died when Ted Kennedy drove his car into a river than died at Three-Mile-Island. That's true but the cost to the economy to clean it up was a bit more than hiring a tow-truck to drag the car out.

Another made the comment about only 3 people dying at Chernobyl, the same argument applies - it isn't the number of deaths, it is the potential number of deaths had the clean-up not been done properly. Can you really imagine Thais doing a proper job? While slagging off the foreigners and keeping them out? I think it's unlikely.

Someone else made the comment that more people die on Thai roads. Again that's true but not relevant. If anyone has ever shared Thai roads with Thais, the reason for the roadkill rate is obvious too, But again, its not the actual number of deaths, its the risk and the cost to the economy. Could Thailand afford to do a Chernobyl clean-up? No, and lets not even talk about Fukushima.

The bottom line here (imho) is that Thais are almost completely useless. As someone else said, everyone wants to be expert but are too lazy to learn how to be expert. Thais are expert at the bodge job, that's about it. And before the trolls clamber pout from under their bridges, that's not to say there are no experts or that there are no competent people in Thailand, of course there are, but there are considerably fewer of them that there should be, and than you would generally find in the Western world. The education system is the problem and even those who could easily have done something about that have not done so. The conclusion must be that poor education has been a strategy in Thailand for many years - again IMHO.

The nuclear risk is not just worth it where Thailand is concerned, but we should always allow them to brag and boast and pretend to be all modern and better than foreigners, that's an important part of the Thai psyche, an important part of coping with being a 3rd-world country. Lets not even think about the opportunities a nuclear project would have for stealing, an opportunity which a great many Thais would just not be able to resist.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not Thai-bashing (moderators with sensitive souls or Thai girlfriends please note). I lived happily in Thailand for many years and I still have many educated and accomplished Thai friends, but the reality is they are anomalies in a country which is largely under-educated, and parts of which have been deliberately kept back in the stone age so that a rich few can benefit. I certainly lived there long enough to understand the Thai psychology pretty well - and it's not a pretty thing to behold. I am not easily fooled or persuaded where Thais are concerned, I have waaay too much evidence that my view is the correct one - for me at least. Perhaps being a psychologist and psychotherapist has been useful in that respect.

And for any mud crabs out there who might be waiting to pounce from their underground habitats, I used a spall-checker this time, I hope you approve. I'll focus on grammar next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever get around to building a Nuclear Power Plant here in Thailand,

I will be on the first plane out.with someone like Somchai Simpson at the

controls. Lets see how they get on with the Fast Trains first !.

regards Worgeordie

You better get the next flight out then. Thailand has been operating Nuclear Power Plants for the last 53 years, since 1962. there are now two plants. France has 58 reactors, the UK only 16 although we started out as World Leaders in the Technology. Thailand has a 53 year proven track record of safely operating Nuclear Power Plants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any conversation on electricity generation, nuclear or otherwise, should open with the question "Why do horses shit balls, cows shit pats and goats shit pellets?"

Followed by "why should I listen to your opinion when you don't know shit?"

Apologies for the Americanism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear power is our only answer. As long as it's a breeder reactor all will be fine. Solar and wind just won't cut it for world demands. Fossil fuels are damaging the planet and causing global warming. We need to go bio fuels and or electric cars. And end the opec cartel. Put the Arab nations back in the desert where they belong.

One thing that is often (make that pretty much always) overlooked about using solar and wind power is that it requires a massive infrastructure to achieve usable output levels, that infrastructure requires lots of raw materials to build; for example copper for the thousands of generators in wind turbines and cables connecting them throughout the landscape that would be necessary to meet the demands that a single nuclear power plant would cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they ever get around to building a Nuclear Power Plant here in Thailand,

I will be on the first plane out.with someone like Somchai Simpson at the

controls. Lets see how they get on with the Fast Trains first !.

regards Worgeordie

You better get the next flight out then. Thailand has been operating Nuclear Power Plants for the last 53 years, since 1962. there are now two plants. France has 58 reactors, the UK only 16 although we started out as World Leaders in the Technology. Thailand has a 53 year proven track record of safely operating Nuclear Power Plants.

And how big might they be? This nonsense has already been dealt with in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any conversation on electricity generation, nuclear or otherwise, should open with the question "Why do horses shit balls, cows shit pats and goats shit pellets?"

Followed by "why should I listen to your opinion when you don't know shit?"

Apologies for the Americanism.

Wonder what happened to the board's naughty word detector.

Impressive scatological awareness...

Apologies for the Australianism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

The reason that the Philippines reactor never started is not a lack of fuel (or any unwillingness to supply same) but fact that some idiot chose to build it slap on top of a major seismic fault. Fortunately they never started it up as a result.

That said, nuclear for Thailand is an economic nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

The reason that the Philippines reactor did not start was unrelated to fuel supply - the US would have been happy to provide at the time. Instead the reason was because some idiot had loctaed it slap bank above a major seismic fault. Than heavens it never was fueled up.

That said, nuclear for Thailand is an economic nonsense. Better to (as an agricultural country) to go bio-fuel to the extent possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When discussing Nuclear power people should also discuss newer and safer technologies such as Thorium ADSR technology which reports suggest could be cheaper, safer and produce less waste to say nothing of the much reduced possibility of producing weapons grade material

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-09/16/a-nuclear-future

And https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerator-driven_sub-critical_reactor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...