Why French people have nothing against nuclear?
 

Hi,

After the reject from the German people of the nuclear energie (Umfrage zeigt deutliche Stimmung gegen Atomkraft in Deutschland), maybe, some other leading countries in EU will follow?

- Actually, not.

I was discussing with French authorities, French people,... they say that massively the people are accepting this source of energy and see no danger about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_people

It is like doing sport, everyone can. Renewable energy? Like smoking, you have the choice.

In Germany, there are few interesting articles to read (in German):

http://www.grohnde-kampagne.de/2013-...ng_Detmold.pdf
http://umweltinstitut.org/download/f...l_Download.pdf
http://www.windland.ch/wordpress/?lang=de_de
"http://www.berndsenf.de/pdf/Der Wahnsinn des durchdrehenden Kapitalismus.pdf"


So, let's check with a poll, destined to French people, whether you prefer with or without nuclear energy (poll destined to French Linux users).

All the best,
X.

Unfortunately the corporate propaganda outlets ("news" before the fascist world order) leave out many truths. For example, here in America the fascists were using Navajo indians to mine their uranium and when they started dying like flies the federal corporation ("government" before fascism) just wrote them a check and sent them home.

I think the term "nuclear energy" is somewhat of a misnomer, however. Solar energy comes from the great reactor in the sky. It's not the source of the energy but the fascists who monopolize the power that's the issue. Free energy for everyone would be great but that would bankrupt British Petroleum and Haliburton so it's not going to happen. They won't allow it.

Most of the French plants are on the Chanel coast: if they go wrong, the fall-out will be on the UK! But, seriously, the French are probably more pragmatic. Nuclear has problems down the line with waste, but doing without it has problems in the here and now: power shortages, soaring prices, dependency on unreliable sources like Russia and the Arabs.

As for the idea that the "fascists who monopolize the power" will block solar energy, the world's biggest solar power plants (current and under construction) are in the USA. BP was a major player in solar power once, but the business didn't make a profit so they switched their non-fuel activity to wind power.

"Free" What I like is that if you are using solar energy to power your home, you shall pay taxes. Sun is free, no?

There was a good Hollywood movie about something like that.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105585

It depends. I think that current nuclear plants should not be used, because they produce tons of radioactive waste. Maybe if they switch to Thorium reactors then I would support the idea.

In Germany, they really see danger about it. Sure there is. People are dying in the whole because of that.

I like Germany mentality to kick nuclear, and go "Green". Politics are great, hey hey, this is why Germany has the best economy world - wide.

If Fukushima and Chernobyl aren't enough as example to stop the nuclear, I don't know what say..

Both are highly suspicious in terms of what or who exactly caused them. Thus, to me these arguments are null.

Three Mile Island USA, Windscale UK, Tsuruga Japan, Tomsk USSR, Tokaimura Japan, are more examples.

Say what? An earthquake is highly suspicious? Are you serious?

Hi H_TeXMeX_H, which should be the "right" arguments for you?
The history talks for us and the history says that even ONE only nuclear incident can have a catastrophic impact on the human life and on the environment (and not only local).

The right argument is the tons of nuclear waste that is very difficult to dispose of and deal with. Other than that, nuclear reactors are quite safe, assuming no foul play.

Good point.
Sorry, but not in my opinion:
1. Quite safe is not safe enough for something as dangerous as a nuclear reaction of this kind.
2. Although highly automated, nuclear power plants are still operated and designed by humans. Humans are prone to error, so operating a nuclear power plant is prone to error.

If you consider the accidents in detail, they were in early reactors (Windscale) or those with incompetent management (Chernobyl, Three Mile Island). A check at Wikipedia suggests that most of major problems have been in the USA (poorly regulated private enterprise) and the old Soviet block (even worse state enterprise).

The consequences have generally been minor: of the clean-up crew at Windscale, none experienced any related health problems during the next 50 years.