Manmohan Singh blames US NGOs for anti-nuclear demonstrations

[lynx]

ea but we not utlizing the onse source that we have in abundance our coastline, using Wave generating electricity. More discussion should be brought up.

They are not developed enough to challenge the conventional forms of energy production and we are not a developed nation to have the luxury to experiment with this type of non-conventional energy resources.

---------- Post added at 01:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:05 AM ----------

NGO = Negative Growth Operators

These NGO's are burden on humanity and invented by westerners and this scum technology later spread through out the world specially third world countries so that these countries never progress.

Not all NGOs are bad but like in everything else there are bad apples.

 

[trinity]

He may be suggesting that we return to our past of living with no power.

No. I suggest you read more, even the gov;t scientists said more testing should be done yet the gov;t is trying to shove this project down without testing more. Are the local residents even given tablets out for free in the even of a nuclear meltdown? There is no clear cut procedures for safety only for the plant itself. The Russians are notoriously lax in safety issues. The French are the best but the issue in TN is a Russian made reactor. Japan;s incident is not the first. There have been other cases of near danger. Also, remember what you read is the worst reported documented cases. Many issues are not reported publicly. How about leakage of radioactive haevy water into the soil? The problem is that you are not even aware of the potential issues and how the gov;t has conveniently sidestepped such issues. Yeah,i have the convenience of such electricity but my family stills lives in India, so they deal with it.

I bring up Anna all the time in almost every post to remind folks. What happened, there is not a peep about him and his ovement. Why?


No, i am not suggesting that at all. In the past, India was the epitome of a green civilization even though such a life is slower and harder in some aspects. The rush for modernity, convenience, and development brings many problems as well. India is not equipped to deal with such challenges. Its sort of like policy that the India gov;t is reactive not Proactive. We do not have many rules andlaws in place to properly keep a check on such issues. All I am saying is that coal, water

 

[janon]

Yea but we not utilizing the one source that we have in abundance our coastline, using Wave generating electricity. More discussion/ debate should be brought up on the subject. Those are good baby steps but more can be done. More investment, more importantly govt policy should encourage more green tech by making it a law.

Are you really knowledgeable enough to comment on this? Do you know what has been tried in the past, and what were the challenges faced? It is easy to sit somewhere and say "oh we must use tides, not nuclear energy".

For the record, this was tried, and failed. A tidal power plant using existing technology was built near thiruvananthapuram, and ended up consuming more electricity than it produced. It was realised that there is no way to generate electricity from tides to any beneficial extent. Also, the maximum power that could be generated by that plant even theoretically was 150 Kw. That is, about 0.0075% the power that would be generated by the Koodankulam plant. SO if we can consstruct about 13,333 plants like that one, we might be able to match the output of the koodankulam plant - but will have to provide more energy to build those than they will yield us.

This is why people shouldn't give half baked, uninformed suggestions like "oh, forget nuclear plants, lets go for tidal" etc.

Tidal Power Plant in Thiruvananthapuram India

 

[trinity]

They are not developed enough to challenge the conventional forms of energy production and we are not a developed nation to have the luxury to experiment with this type of non-conventional energy resources.

---------- Post added at 01:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:05 AM ----------



Not all NGOs are bad but like in everything else there are bad apples.

I understand, nothing beats conventional energy for now. I am just saying before we rush into anything, let's put our great minds together and come up with an inclusive paln that addresses all the issues not just the plant itself. If the gov;t was the first to enact a rule where all bus and autorichshaws use green tech, that would create an industry. If the gov;t enforced rules like that or passed such where cars built after 2015 have to be green tech, it will create an industry. Its not perfect but we will the first to see the problems and develop solutions to it. Battery, solar, biofuel (I don;t like some of it but there are possible better sources), etc. can be overcome for lack of tech with more service stations....

 

[janon]

No, i am not suggesting that at all. In the past, India was the epitome of a green civilization even though such a life is slower and harder in some aspects. The rush for modernity, convenience, and development brings many problems as well. India is not equipped to deal with such challenges. Its sort of like policy that the India gov;t is reactive not Proactive. We do not have many rules andlaws in place to properly keep a check on such issues. All I am saying is that coal, water

India might have been the epitome of a green civilisation before electricity was invented. Since electrification began in India, we have always been short of enough electricity to let our people live in good conditions. It is just not fair that Indians have to make do with about 1/10 th that their counterparts in the west do, and that we are not able to live a better lifestyle because we don't generate enough power.

If you want to live a pre-20th century lifestyle with no electricity or modern conveniences, that is entirely your choice. India is a free country, and you have every right to live the lifestyle of your choice. But don't demand other people that they should live the lifestyle that appeals to you. If other people want electricity, and are prepared to pay for it, you have no right to deny them those comforts or conveniences. So if most people want to live a life of comfort, and not have to live like pre industrialised times, thats up to them. You don't get to decide what kind of things other people value.

---------- Post added at 01:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------

I understand, nothing beats conventional energy for now. I am just saying before we rush into anything, let's put our great minds together and come up with an inclusive paln that addresses all the issues not just the plant itself. If the gov;t was the first to enact a rule where all bus and autorichshaws use green tech, that would create an industry. If the gov;t enforced rules like that or passed such where cars built after 2015 have to be green tech, it will create an industry. Its not perfect but we will the first to see the problems and develop solutions to it. Battery, solar, biofuel (I don;t like some of it but there are possible better sources), etc. can be overcome for lack of tech with more service stations....

All that is fine, and can go on. But none of that can be a replacement for nuclear power plants. It is not one or the other. Even if autorikshaws were green (which doesnt mean they run on water - it just means they will use less fuel and polute less) we would still need electricity. You began this by claiming that there are valid reasons for some tamilians to protest the plant due to safety concerns. The safety concerns or comparisons to Fukushima don't hold water, and your desire to see investment in greener energy does not legitimise the call for the koodankulam plant to be shut down.

 

[trinity]

Are you really knowledgeable enough to comment on this? Do you know what has been tried in the past, and what were the challenges faced? It is easy to sit somewhere and say "oh we must use tides, not nuclear energy".

For the record, this was tried, and failed. A tidal power plant using existing technology was built near thiruvananthapuram, and ended up consuming more electricity than it produced. It was realised that there is no way to generate electricity from tides to any beneficial extent. Also, the maximum power that could be generated by that plant even theoretically was 150 Kw. That is, about 0.0075% the power that would be generated by the Koodankulam plant. SO if we can consstruct about 13,333 plants like that one, we might be able to match the output of the koodankulam plant - but will have to provide more energy to build those than they will yield us.

This is why people shouldn't give half baked, uninformed suggestions like "oh, forget nuclear plants, lets go for tidal" etc.

Tidal Power Plant in Thiruvananthapuram India

Nobody said forget anything. Folks like yourself should read properly. I said develop other sources. So, just becuase this plan was not successful , it means forget about tidal energy? They built this but how come the Europeans are successful with their model. Maybe, we should have a competition with multiple teams competing with different ideas on how to set it up?

By developing other sources, we reduce our independence on Nuclear Energy. Its safer. Its sheer stupidity to compare the electricity generates by green sources to proven Nuclear tech.


I have a commercial property near a nuclear plant in the US. As an owner, I get a lot of info. Are you aware that residents are given a Potassium Iodide pills free of charge. Does india do the same? Do they even have an adequate supply? That's why i am advocating for sufficient planning.


So, before you go about acting like a monkey accusing me of half baked ideas.....read a bit and slow down....maybe you cant digest an American giving you some feedback, if so shove it where the sun don;t shine

 

[lynx]

I understand, nothing beats conventional energy for now. I am just saying before we rush into anything, let's put our great minds together and come up with an inclusive paln that addresses all the issues not just the plant itself.

We are not rushing into anything. The Kodamkulam Plant is under construction for the last 20 years and when it is close to commissioning, Fukoshima happened and all hell broke loose. This opposition is purely based on fear mongering by some NGOs and environmental lobbies.

If the gov;t was the first to enact a rule where all bus and autorichshaws use green tech, that would create an industry. If the gov;t enforced rules like that or passed such where cars built after 2015 have to be green tech, it will create an industry. Its not perfect but we will the first to see the problems and develop solutions to it. Battery, solar, biofuel (I don;t like some of it but there are possible better sources), etc. can be overcome for lack of tech with more service stations....

You give us some practical successful examples of the above and we can think about it.

 

[trinity]

India might have been the epitome of a green civilisation before electricity was invented. Since electrification began in India, we have always been short of enough electricity to let our people live in good conditions. It is just not fair that Indians have to make do with about 1/10 th that their counterparts in the west do, and that we are not able to live a better lifestyle because we don't generate enough power.

If you want to live a pre-20th century lifestyle with no electricity or modern conveniences, that is entirely your choice. India is a free country, and you have every right to live the lifestyle of your choice. But don't demand other people that they should live the lifestyle that appeals to you. If other people want electricity, and are prepared to pay for it, you have no right to deny them those comforts or conveniences. So if most people want to live a life of comfort, and not have to live like pre industrialised times, thats up to them. You don't get to decide what kind of things other people value.

---------- Post added at 01:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------



All that is fine, and can go on. But none of that can be a replacement for nuclear power plants. It is not one or the other. Even if autorikshaws were green (which doesnt mean they run on water - it just means they will use less fuel and polute less) we would still need electricity. You began this by claiming that there are valid reasons for some tamilians to protest the plant due to safety concerns. The safety concerns or comparisons to Fukushima don't hold water, and your desire to see investment in greener energy does not legitimise the call for the koodankulam plant to be shut down.

It does have merit , maybe they should change the location and put it in your backyard....then you will have unlimited supply of your energy. Nobody is forcing anyone to live in a pre elctricity existence. Who doesn;t enjoy modern conveniences? Who would choose to live such an existence if they had a choice. The choices bein offered to the ppl have their problems also that need to be addresses. Pollution is the biggest threat to India ....I already can see it. You do not have proper infrastructure in place to handle waste, how the hell will you handle a nuclear disaster. What plans are in place? Just because you made a bloody agency doesn;t mean crap. What are the checks and balances in place? India lacks an agency like the FDA so how the hell will ppl know if they are eating contmainated food?


What such tech will do is lower the number of Nuclear reactors depending on far the gov't pushes it.


Do you even know where the station is being built? Who says a natural disaster cannot happen again? A Tsunami has happened before and can happan again.

You sound realy stupid for defending something without even getting the facts straight. You don;t any merit to talk about this subject, yet you blindly support it.

 

[janon]

Nobody said forget anything. Folks like yourself should read properly. I said develop other sources. So, just becuase this plan was not successful , it means forget about tidal energy? They built this but how come the Europeans are successful with their model. Maybe, we should have a competition with multiple teams competing with different ideas on how to set it up?

By developing other sources, we reduce our independence on Nuclear Energy. Its safer. Its sheer stupidity to compare the electricity generates by green sources to proven Nuclear tech.


I have a commercial property near a nuclear plant in the US. As an owner, I get a lot of info. Are you aware that residents are given a Potassium Iodide pills free of charge. Does india do the same? Do they even have an adequate supply? That's why i am advocating for sufficient planning.


So, before you go about acting like a monkey accusing me of half baked ideas.....read a bit and slow down....maybe you cant digest an American giving you some feedback, if so shove it where the sun don;t shine

From your Indian flag I assumed you are Indian, so the question of not digesting an american giving me feedback doesn't apply at all. Also, if I didn't like Americans giving me feedback, I wouldn't be living in America. I see that you have resorted to personal attacks, attributing national prejudices etc when all I did was show you some hard facts. I am not in the habit of shoving things in that place, and at the moment am not taking suggestions for that from people who do.

Anyway, you said that there was valid justification for opposing the plant due to safety. You can read the opinions of all the experts, including our own scientists, that it is a non issue, and that the plant is safe.

Then you said that we should go for green energy. From the context, it was obvious you were saying we should go for that instead of nusclear, but now you have changed it to say that we need those while developing nuclear. You asked why we are not going for tidal, without knwoing that we HAVE gone for it before, and found it not feasible, and decided not to pursue that. Also, you fail to realise that the needs of our country are huge, and cannot ever be filled by merely green energy. If we want to reduce dependance on coal and imrpove electric supply, nuclear is inevitable.

Then you suggested something about India having been an epitome of green living, and that people can live like they used to earlier. To which I said that such a lifestyle is one's personal choice, and you are free to live so if you want.

Then you said I'm acting like a monkey (since monkeys don't give reasoned responses in online forums, I don't know how I acted like one), and suggested I don't like americans, and suggested shoving something somewhere.

When a person degenerates into personal attacks, I prefer to grin in satisfaction that he has run out of reasoned arguments (or that he didn't have any in the first place), and stop discussing with him, and let the readers judge.

 

[janon]

It does have merit , maybe they should change the location and put it in your backyard....then you will have unlimited supply of your energy. Nobody is forcing anyone to live in a pre elctricity existence. Who doesn;t enjoy modern conveniences? Who would choose to live such an existence if they had a choice. The choices bein offered to the ppl have their problems also that need to be addresses. Pollution is the biggest threat to India ....I already can see it. You do not have proper infrastructure in place to handle waste, how the hell will you handle a nuclear disaster. What plans are in place? Just because you made a bloody agency doesn;t mean crap. What are the checks and balances in place? India lacks an agency like the FDA so how the hell will ppl know if they are eating contmainated food?


What such tech will do is lower the number of Nuclear reactors depending on far the gov't pushes it.


Do you even know where the station is being built? Who says a natural disaster cannot happen again? A Tsunami has happened before and can happan again.

You sound realy stupid for defending something without even getting the facts straight. You don;t any merit to talk about this subject, yet you blindly support it.

I think it is kind of obvious who has more knowledge about the subject, you or I. Which fact didn' I get straight, care to point out? Anyway, as I said, unless you come up with any factual data to support your position that the plant is unsafe, when all experts have agreed it is safe, I will not respond again. I take it as a given that since you devolved into personal attacks, and clearly don't know what all has been tried in this field, it does nobody any service to discuss with you. And by the way they have specifically stated that it can withstand a tsunami too.

 

[trinity]

We are not rushing into anything. The Kodamkulam Plant is under construction for the last 20 years and when it is close to commissioning, Fukoshima happened and all hell broke loose. This opposition is purely based on fear mongering by some NGOs and environmental lobbies.



You give us some practical successful examples of the above and we can think about it.

Listen, you can make this a poitical issue but it has nothing to do with politics. TN was hit a tsunami that nobody predicted. It can happen again. Sure, I read the that software has been developed that can take an reactor offline but it was developed only very recently. 20yrs you said.....Thank God...otherwise, this project would have old Russian Tech garabge regarding safety.

Plz If listen to the politics of India or TN, I would believe that the Mullapperiyar Dam is safe to use for a 1000 yrs right?



Its not for me to give you examples. The gov't should create a forum and it should do the research. The govt; lacks visonaries that is the key issue when you keep on electing dimwits. MMS is a great politican that india has since many yrs. But if you keep on electing stupid corrupt ppl, what do you expect? The ideas I mentioned are just ideas, but they are feasible. What you will see are other nations taking such intiatives and Indians always wondering why couldn;t have done that.

 

[trinity]

From your Indian flag I assumed you are Indian, so the question of not digesting an american giving me feedback doesn't apply at all. Also, if I didn't like Americans giving me feedback, I wouldn't be living in America. I see that you have resorted to personal attacks, attributing national prejudices etc when all I did was show you some hard facts. I am not in the habit of shoving things in that place, and at the moment am not taking suggestions for that from people who do.

Anyway, you said that there was valid justification for opposing the plant due to safety. You can read the opinions of all the experts, including our own scientists, that it is a non issue, and that the plant is safe.

Then you said that we should go for green energy. From the context, it was obvious you were saying we should go for that instead of nusclear, but now you have changed it to say that we need those while developing nuclear. You asked why we are not going for tidal, without knwoing that we HAVE gone for it before, and found it not feasible, and decided not to pursue that. Also, you fail to realise that the needs of our country are huge, and cannot ever be filled by merely green energy. If we want to reduce dependance on coal and imrpove electric supply, nuclear is inevitable.

Then you suggested something about India having been an epitome of green living, and that people can live like they used to earlier. To which I said that such a lifestyle is one's personal choice, and you are free to live so if you want.

Then you said I'm acting like a monkey (since monkeys don't give reasoned responses in online forums, I don't know how I acted like one), and suggested I don't like americans, and suggested shoving something somewhere.

When a person degenerates into personal attacks, I prefer to grin in satisfaction that he has run out of reasoned arguments (or that he didn't have any in the first place), and stop discussing with him, and let the readers judge.

Listen Im not attacking you. I get a lot of crap on this site from fellow Indians. The tidal project you mentioned could have weaknesses right? So, this group took part in one project and called it quits? I mean doesn;t that logic sound flawed? They took one single project and used the data obtained from that to make a conclusion about the viability of such energy and why Nuclear energy should be pursued? Doesn;t that itself make you question the validity of such a project in the first place? Who funded that project? There are lot of holes with that story. Was this modeled after the same project that the British conducted? These cold hard facts that say much at all like nuclear energy creates more energy than green sources (wow I never knew that *sacrasm)!

I didn't advocate using ONLY green tech. Thats impossible with folks who love the fast life! Maybe the way I conveyed my thought or the way you interpreted is the issue. In order for green tech to be feasible and to overtake Nuclear energy it will require research, capital investment and will. So, you wasted a paragragh on a point that I have no issue with it.

YOu mention quality of life yet you fail to consider how folks in india already use solar and wind tech to generate their own electricity its happening in the US as well. You know that right? The investment eventually pays itself and you can sell the excess energy to your local power company.

You live in the US yet you are totally unfamiliar with the problems associated with such tech? Hard to believe. If you want a better grasp of the ground realities of such tech, read up there is a shitload of information that gives the pros and cons. I would suggest a gov't site. Also, be aware this an industry that hires lobbyists. They are in the business of making money, simple.

As for the safety concerns, you never answered key points I made about disaster preparedness.

Safety, is only one concern. Why would I trust the sources that give such guarantees. Their jobs are on the line. There are also scientists that advocate for more checks to be done, yet you conveniently ignore that. How about letting an outdside group free of any politics conduct their own unbiased approach to this project? More importantly, seeing how this Nuclear Reactor is in a region known for Tsunamis like Japan, how about we take the time to learn everything about the japanese tradegy. They have not released any data yet, but much can be learned about it which can then be incorporate to implement better practices regarding tech, design, etc. After conducting such studies, we will learn if it actually worth placing such a reactor in such a location.

The problem is that you want this reactor without doing the proper groundwork that covers all angles. Nobody wants India to be developed more than I, but it should be done in a safe and cautious manner.


So, let the readers judge.

 

[janon]

Listen Im not attacking you. I get a lot of crap on this site from fellow Indians. The tidal project you mentioned could have weaknesses right? So, they took part in one project and called it quits? Doesn;t that logic sound flawed? They took one single project and used the data obtained from that to make a conclusion about the viability of such energy and why Nuclear energy should be pursued? Who funded that project? Because there are lot of holes with that story. So, these cold hard facts that say much at all. Nuclear energy creates more energy than green sources (wow I never knew that *sacrasm). I didn;t advocate using only green tech. Thats impossible. Maybe the way I conveyed my thought or the way you interpreted is the issue. In order for green tech to be feasible and to overtake Nuclear energy will take research, capital investment and will.

YOu mention qualiy of like yet you fail to consider how folks in india already use solar and wind tech to generate their own electricity its happening in the US as well. You now that right, the investment eventually pays itself and you can sell the excess energy to your local power company.

You live in the US yet are totally unfamiliar with the problems associated with such tech? Hard to believe. If you want a better grasp of the ground realities of such tech, read up there is a shitload of information that gives the pros and cons. Also, be aware this an industry that hires lobbyists. They are in the business of making money, simple.

As for the saefty concerns, you never answered key points I made about diaster preparedness.


So, let the readers judge.





Safety, is only one concern. Why would I trust the sources that give such guarantees. Their jobs are on the line. There also scientists that say more checks need to be done, yet you conveniently ignore that. How about letting an outdside group free of any politics conduct their own unbiased approach to this project? More imoportantly, seeing how this Nuclear Reactor is in a region known for Tsunamis like Japan, how about we take the time to learn the everything about the japanese tradegy. They have not realesed any data yet, but much can be learned about it which can then be used to implement better practices regarding tech, design, etc. After conducting such studies, we will learn if it actually worth palcin such a reactor in such a location.

Thats a simplistic understanding of the picture. No, that's not what happened - the unviability of tidal power as a large scale source of energy has been understood the world over, which is why there aren't any large scale tidal plant anywhere. They can only give power output in the kilowatt range, whereas we are looking for plants which can give power in the gigawatt range - a million times more. Those are our needs. It is not like they "took data" from the plant and ran it through a computer and came to a conclusion - the fact is that nobody has come up with a way to get gigawatts of power, and cannot. These are real world restricitons, not conclusions reached due to lack of political will.

And they didn't call it quits after that. They are still researching tidal energy, and they are going to build Asia's largest tidal plant, in Gujarat soon. But the energy they get will still be only a fraction of a percent of what we can get from a nuclear plant, despite being one of the largest tidal plants in the world. And the country's needs today are in the range of what nuclear plants can provide (and more), and therefore we need energy from all sources we can get, including nuclear. That is why bringing in tidal power in a discussion about shutting down of a nuclear plant doesn't hold water.

Since you are clearly unaware of the developments in these fields in the past and present, you really should desist from suggestions that require said knowledge. How can you say things like "the tidal project could have had weaknesses" and "they call it quits", when you were not aware of even the existence of the said project or the current one?

I am well aware of how wind and solar power is used in the US. I know that it does not power huge cities or giant industries, and never can. Same for India. No matter how many people use green energy, we would still need to generate several more gigawatts of energy to raise our living standards to western levels. There is no escaping that fact.

You didn't raise any questions about safety preparedness, except to allege that there is no safety preparedness in India and that our people are incapable of being as prepared as americans. Can you point out any real, concrete reasons for that, other than your general distrust of Indian competitiveness?

 

[trinity]

Thats a simplistic understanding of the picture. No, that's not what happened - the unviability of tidal power as a large scale source of energy has been understood the world over, which is why there aren't any large scale tidal plant anywhere. They can only give power output in the kilowatt range, whereas we are looking for plants which can give power in the gigawatt range - a million times more. Those are our needs. It is not like they "took data" from the plant and ran it through a computer and came to a conclusion - the fact is that nobody has come up with a way to get gigawatts of power, and cannot. These are real world restricitons, not conclusions reached due to lack of political will.

And they didn't call it quits after that. They are still researching tidal energy, and they are going to build Asia's largest tidal plant, in Gujarat soon. But the energy they get will still be only a fraction of a percent of what we can get from a nuclear plant, despite being one of the largest tidal plants in the world. And the country's needs today are in the range of what nuclear plants can provide (and more), and therefore we need energy from all sources we can get, including nuclear. That is why bringing in tidal power in a discussion about shutting down of a nuclear plant doesn't hold water.

Since you are clearly unaware of the developments in these fields in the past and present, you really should desist from suggestions that require said knowledge. How can you say things like "the tidal project could have had weaknesses" and "they call it quits", when you were not aware of even the existence of the said project or the current one?

I am well aware of how wind and solar power is used in the US. I know that it does not power huge cities or giant industries, and never can. Same for India. No matter how many people use green energy, we would still need to generate several more gigawatts of energy to raise our living standards to western levels. There is no escaping that fact.

You didn't raise any questions about safety preparedness, except to allege that there is no safety preparedness in India and that our people are incapable of being as prepared as americans. Can you point out any real, concrete reasons for that, other than your general distrust of Indian competitiveness?

You are clearly biased in your approach. You think you are the first person to report about the tidal research in Kerala? Sorry Buddy, it was posted on this forum a while back but not a lot of details the actual project itself. I was not aware of the Gujurat development though, if that makes you feel better. AGAIN NOBODY IS STATING GET RID OF NUCLEAR REACTORS TILL WE ESTABLISHED AN ALTERNATE, VIABLE SOURCE, GOT IT? Both technologies can be used to complement each other. By reducing the need of electricity and fossil fuels in some ways, it will allow for more energy to be used for bigger purposes. DO you know city buses in NYC are all hybrids? Im sure you are not aware of such tech and developments, thatsd why you keep on sticking to points that I have not argued about. I hate when folks ike yourself ramble about how you know this and that, but lack common sense. Anyone can read a book and gather what you dished out. YOu are confusing many points to a make your weak point, but its a point that I don;t have an issue with it. I know more nuclear reactors have to be built.

My primary concern was safety got it. The state of affairs could be a lot better. YOu never answered my question about the KI tablets? The answer to that question will the biggest cue of safety for the tamil ppl.


When China shows you how to do it, then what are going to say then. The Chinese have already stated to make their country green as much as possible .........here read up

China’s 12th Five Year Plan sets out the goals in striking detail. Green energy vehicles, environmental conservation, solar and wind power – all are to be developed, through both technology leverage and leapfrogging. It has been reported that the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) in its ‘new energy industry development’ road map foresees a situation where China would be generating 1600 GW of electric power by 2020, of which no less than 500 GW would be coming from renewable energies – 300 GW from hydro, 150 GW from wind, 30 GW from biomass and 20 GW from solar photovoltaic.
By contrast the UK generates around 110 GW in total, of which coal and gas account for 75%, and renewables for less than 10%. Wind power had reached 5.9 GW in cumulative capacity in the UK by 2010, on a par with France.
As China’s green strategies build on themselves, in cumulative S-shaped industrial dynamics, where success builds on success, no less than 30% of electric power generated by 2020 is expected by the country’s leaders to be coming from renewable sources. If nuclear is added to that (reaching probably 70-100 GW by 2020) then non-fossil sources would be generating 600 GW out of 1600 GW – building up an unstoppable industrial momentum (in terms of capital invested in technology, firms, standards, supply chains and markets). This in turn would be expected to translate into export potential, first of renewable energy components, then systems, and finally of technology itself. China is the one country in the world that is promoting both renewables and nuclear – like it or not.



China's Big Bet on Green Industry - And How it Might Green the World

 

[trinity]

im well aware of how old the DAE. Can you without any bias show the reports on the safety on the Nuclear Reactors. A lot of it is still withheld from the public. So, where is this the Public oversight..

Atomic Energy Regulatory Board - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


You think or feel the US is the best while I clearly don;t. They have made many mistakes also, and they can also learn a lot. But at least they are willing to admit mistakes and learn from it...instead of endlessly defending it to the point where they like like morons..