Comments by "David Cruse" (@davidcruse6589) on "‘I don’t think that’s quite right’: Ross Greenwood criticises Chris Bowen’s nuclear stance" video.

  1. Nuclar is the cleaner and less destructive to our environment No where near the destruction of land animals ocean's We use it already in medical so do we stop that because its to expensive Now getting subs are they to expensive Also after Nuclar power stations used what it can of the rods They are able to use for medical services which use up most of the rest of the rods Making them low grade waste So you get double the bang for your buck from the Nuclar rods and has to make it more efficient in costs Has anyone bother adding this in calculations on Nuclar power stations t Then much greener less destructive on environment Besides save from damaging weather conditions and dont have 15 to 25 yr life spand with massive toxic waste to deal with In panel wind mills blade ever 15 years and now countries finding out niether renewables have the life span claimed
    1
  2. Twiggy right no money in Nuclar as once built low mantiance Solar windmills hydro all high maintenance and constantly replacing Plenty money for people like twiggy in renewables Just another elite dictating to the majority to keep them poor and him and mates rich The problem is the elites are the politicians who all have family and friends investing in things like renewables Because know as above high maintenance and replacement as economy rises so does replacement and maintenance More chances for gouging Has anyone taken that into account on nuclar against renewables as nuclar build no more cost on infrastructure as economy rises It'll only be on maintenance which will be less then renewables
    1