NUCLEAR NONSENSE

The greenie news editors at the BBC salivate every time they hear about plans to build a nuclear power station. It’s their chance to create more anti-development propaganda. The subject matter today is Sri Lanka, one of the poorer countries on this earth, with a GDP per head of around £3,500. They desperately need cheap energy to make their lives more comfortable and to generate more wealth.

So when the Sri Lanka government decides to build a nuclear power station to help ameliorate poverty, what is the BBC response? Simples, as they say. Let’s talk to a few greenie agitators and stir up a rumpus. The story is specially risible, even by the corporation’s standards set by Black, Harrabin and co. First, the island is “too small” for a nuclear power plant. That will be an island that is 25,000 square miles (more than a quarter of the size of the UK). Second, there’s enough power available from “renewables”. Cobblers. Here’s the latest report on why the said renewables will never be economically viable, anywhere.

What the BBC really wants is to keep Sri Lanka in a permanent poverty, trapped in the European middle class greenie idyll of “sustainable” and “ecologically sound”. What’s completely missing from this story is – predictably – any mention of the case for providing cheap, affordable energy. But then the BBC is not in the business of providing balanced coverage of such matters.

Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to NUCLEAR NONSENSE

  1. Guest Who says:

    Just once in such cases, I’d appreciate my objective national broadcaster seeking and sharing the experience of a selection of qualified engineers on facts, as opposed to the default views of a bunch of agenda-driven numpties, from touchy feely types or rabid activists.

    Just once.

       0 likes

  2. Natsman says:

    Anyone seen this on WattsUpWithThat?  Scary….

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/30/o-m-g-video-explodes-skeptical-kids-in-bloodbath/

       0 likes

    • Roland Deschain says:

      Hey, it’s just “edgy” comedy.

         0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      It got so much attention that the activists who made it had to take it down.  I guess they’re not so proud of their convictions, then.

         0 likes

    • John Horne Tooke says:

      Yes – this person is also part of the vile “10:10 campaign”

         0 likes

      • John Horne Tooke says:

            “Now you’ve seen the video, prepare not to be surprised that your taxes helped pay for it.

            The 10:10 Campaign is supported by:
            ActionAid (Govt of UK 2nd largest funder in 2009);
            The Carbon Trust (surely #1 on the list of quangos-to-go);
            The Energy Saving Trust.

            Be not surprised that The Guardian is their ‘media partner’.

            On the other hand, if you’re outraged by the video, you might be interested to know that they also have a small number of genuine commercial sponsors: O2, Sony and Kyocera all have helped fund the 10:10 Campaign.

            I suggest that the first thing to do is to make your outrage known to O2, Sony and Kyocera, suggesting that their commercial interests might not be furthered by funding murderous nazi will-fulfillment propaganda.”
        http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100056586/eco-fascism-jumps-the-shark-massive-epic-fail/

           0 likes

  3. RGH says:

    ‘At present only a handful of countries including India, France, the US, Japan, Russia, the Ukraine and Germany have nuclear plants.’ says the BBC website report.

    The reality is very different. Nuclear is undergoing a renaissance around the world. Countries like South Korea have more than 11. China is planning for 90.

    The link below shows current capacity worldwide. Some ‘handful’.

    Sloppy reporting at best, wilful denialism at worst. That’s why the BBC reads like a provincial greeny report….short of analysis and facts and full of simplistic fluffiness about reality.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country

       0 likes

  4. NotaSheep says:

    Sometimes it seems tha the only country that the BBC thinks is entitled to have nuclear power is Iran…

       0 likes

  5. 1327 says:

    Lets not forget the chattering classes dislike of Sri Lanka for its treatment of the Tamil Tiger terrorists. Would you believe that instead of engaging their hearts and minds then giving in totally and inviting the murderers into the government the nasty Sri Lankans took military action forcing the Tigers into a small part of the island before annihilating them. At the time the Beeb told us this wouldn’t bring peace to the island but oddly it has !

    Seriously though I trained a couple of Sri Lankan engineers who came over here a few years ago and they were good hard working guys who wanted to make a better life for themselves and their families. So good luck to them.

       0 likes

  6. George R says:

    Because BBC-greenpeace doesn’t give it an airing:

    “The case for nuclear power”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/08/nuclearpower.energy

       0 likes

  7. Beeboidal says:

    Anyone seen this on WattsUpWithThat?  Scary.... 

    Unbelievable.

    I just had to look up the person responsible for that – Ms Franny Armstrong, another Warming fanatic.

    “My dad was a BBC documentary maker, always off to Africa; my mum was taking in homeless people. She was the local activist, he the global — I guess I got into both.”

    Spawn of leftists, one a Beeboid.

    I went to one of London’s most expensive schools. After witnessing the superiority complex that comes with extreme wealth, I wanted nothing more to do with it.”

    Oh, of course. No bog standard Comprehensive for the Beeboid’s girl.

    “I’ve jumped in front of whaling ships and gone on demos, but I realised that instead of being in a crowd of 100,000, film was the most powerful thing I could do.”

    She eventually discovered there is more money in propaganda filmmaking than than being a grubby demoista. Daddy and Al Gore were no doubt inspirational.

    “The people working on climate change are the happiest I know.”

    That’s funny. They appear to be a right miserable  lot to me.

    “The person I want to be with lives in another country, 26 hours away by train. Neither of us flies for personal reasons. He also works obsessively on climate change without a day off, so we never see each other”

    You know your’re nuts, don’t you?

    Oh, and she was once rescued by Boris Johnson when she was attacked by muggers. I wish there had been someone around to rescue the country when it was being mugged by her leftists pals in New Labour.

    .

       0 likes

    • Natsman says:

      Neither of us flies for personal reasons

      Probably nothing whatever to do with carbon, or AGW, but due merely to the fact that they’re both frightened of flying.

      I do wish, however, that she would rush off to “The person I want to be with” (be they a he, or more likely a she), and stay there.  Dopey cow. 

         0 likes

      • Guest Who says:

        Not sure, but I think she was part of the glorious 10:10 ‘No pressure’ gore ad and its PR triumph for the cause, so I suspect Al will have her on his Lear out of the UK PDQ soon.

           0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Beeboidal,
      Great post !

         0 likes

  8. DP111 says:

    If the BBC is so certain that a nation can run on ‘sustainable’ and ecologically sound energy, then why does it not demostrate that by making all the activities of the BBC – broadcasting, internet, office and studio, the whole lot, run on ‘sustainable’ and ecologically sound energy.

       0 likes

    • David Preiser (USA) says:

      If the Beeboids understood what “sustainable” actually means, they’d apply it to economics as well.  They don’t.

         0 likes

  9. Martin says:

    Thing is the BBC is one of the biggest polluters on the planet, funny they never bring it up. The cheer amount of CO2 produced by BBC activities is horrendous.

       0 likes

    • DP111 says:

      The sheer amount of CO2 produced by BBC activities is horrendous.

      And for no purpose except to badger with their hypocritical holier-then-thou attitude, for everyone else to reduce their CO2 output.

      Why should anyone reduce their CO2 output, when the meagre amounts we generate, makes for a greener planet.

      Every time I see their pampered and smug faces, puts in me a bad mood. But I hasten to add, that never would I contemplate blowing up their kids.  

         0 likes