nucleare?

2008/05/30

nucleare?

NO, 100% CONTRARIO AL NUCLEARE

VOI?

30 comments:

Emiliano said...: bravo, pienamente d'accordo con te! avremo fra 20 anni centrali di terza generazione mentre gli altri andranno avanti con l'eolico ed il fotovoltaico! siamo sempre i migliori...sigh; 30/5/08 15:34
Anonymous said...: well, i think that if things are done, as usual, in the "italian style" , is better if we escape immediatly from this country!
But if you consider that there exist very powerful lobbies against the "renewable energy source", it can be a solution in the short-term for two reasons: -reduce the level of dependence from the other countries that do big business with petrol and nuclear power. -if something goes wrong in the plants located in France, Germany ecc. do you think that we'll be all safe in our beautiful country? and remeber that the last terrible accident was in Chernobyl more than 20 years ago.
Ps: The video posted on Grillo's blog is very touching, but is just propaganda. In my opinion is preferable if somebody explains what is the situation in Italy at the moment, what are the alternatives and what are the real risks now.; 30/5/08 18:09
R0b said...: IN ANSWER TO LUDMILLA
no one will do it,
all people involved will always say nothing but NOT the true...
If countries next to us owned nuclear this is not a justification for our country to have it, too.
We can be easily indipendent by ourself with sun, wind, and even petroleum (in Basilicata we have it)...
I hope this country, these people will understand and will be able to open their eyes and face the true, and decide for the best...
I HOPE, but they're Italian...we're Italian...; 30/5/08 20:36
Emiliano said...: ah ludmì, ma chi sei??? ma basta co ste storie, nel mondo nessuno più costruisce centrali nucleari da 20 anni!! first of all, it's not short-term, we need decades to obtain a nuclear plant workable..when we'll finish, the world will dismantle the nuclear plants...and focusing on renewable!so i'm gonna put some uranium in my backyard in order to prepare myself...chernobyl was 20 years ago but its effect will last almost thousands of year...and it has effected wherever in the world...the progress is not killing people and destroying the environment...please stop nuclear!!!; 30/5/08 22:05
Anonymous said...: well, i think that my girlfriend was misundestanded. she just said that since there not (still) exist sorces of renewable energy able to substitute efficiently the dependency on petroleum (just think about the USA&EU that declared the II Gulf War to obtain the control on one of the largest stock in the world) a good strategy can be differentating the sourcing. It is not true that countries are not opening new plant anymore, and if they don't it is only because they already built a lot of plants, and consequently they decided to differentiate the sourcing with sun, wind ecc.
Well, we are not against the renewable, but we just don't want that the energy dependency of this beautiful country will increse moreover.
Ps: Opening a new plant in USA can take max 10 years and the risks of accident are almost equal to zero. PPS: the Petroleum in Basilicata can provide less than the 10% of the need, and you pay it at market price.; 31/5/08 02:17
giulio-politically scorrect said...: I am world known as a Berlusconi supporter so i should consider nuclear as the best choice.
Well it is not the best choice according to me.i alwais make an effort to be over political parties.
The best choice would be developing sun energy,wind and all energies with zero impact(SUSTAINABLE).Sicily should all be covered with solar-panel(i do not know the technical name).
But since in the last 10 years and maybe more we are all keeping talking and talking with no consistent actions but paying more and more in gas i am disappointed.
Gas is increasing and we all know that gas price involves all economy,from our car to price of goods.(italy has no "materie prime" and what we have is useless and expensive to develope as petroleum from basilicata or other regions)
So i suggest that is better for now DO SOMETHING that keep watching italy that goes worse and worse.
If "do something" means re establish production of nuclear energy just using power plants already existing(not building new ones) and do it immediately(max 2-3 years)i agree.
If we as italian alwais do think that nuclear is the aim i disagree.
i see nuclear as the way to cut costs and re-born as economic power right now, but also planning in 10 years to complete dismantle nuclear plants and build this fu**ing eolic plants,solar plants...all in maximum respect of ourselves and next generations.however it is very hard to see a real solution.what you people that alwais wonder about poorest people. should wonder is how many people would indirectly lose their job, their families if gas increase of 30 cents in the next year?
and by answering this question posing the main question.nuclear would REALLY do more damages of no nuclear?????; 31/5/08 02:49
SupeRRousi said...: chi sono vanessa e ludmilla?potrei essere d'accordo con loro solo se fossero fighe... basta con queste false identità....giulio 4 president; 31/5/08 12:01
Anonymous said...: who the fuck are vanessa and ludmilla? they seem to be very clever and they have a general vision of the world... if they are pretty good looking probably we have found the new "tip-up" tigers... and vanessa wrote "girlfriend"...wow; 31/5/08 12:09
Anonymous said...: well, we think that Giulio-grammatically scorret is a suitable student of prof. Gorini! it is really hard to understand his point of view...Can you explain it better?please..
And just another question: do you think it is possible build a plant in 2 or 3 years?
Ps: are you really a Berlusconi supporter? aren't you ashamed of yourself?; 31/5/08 12:21
Anonymous said...: ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????vanessa????????ludmilla?????
vanessa loves ludmilla??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????; 31/5/08 12:42
Emiliano said...: appoggio la mozione Rosario...Io già me le vedo...Ludmilla è una figueira di proporzioni bibliche, bionda occhi azzurri alta 2 metri, inglese perfetto ma con quell'accento della periferia di san pietroburgo che arrapa sempre...mentre vanessa è la classica bielorussa, cintura nera di kamasutra, occhi di ghiaccio...mmmmm...CHE BOCCONCINI!!! vi cercheremo con ansia per tutta l'università...che avete capito..per parlare di nucleare no?!; 31/5/08 14:29
Roxy said...: secondo m c'è il duca dietro vanessa e ludmilla!ovviamente in senso figurato, non fisico come vorrebbe lui..hihihi!; 31/5/08 14:48
Arianna said...: rossana cmq è sempre la mejo!!!Rox sei una GGGRRROSSSAAAAAA!!!; 31/5/08 14:55
Anonymous said...: meuw, i know really much in depth vanessa & ludmilla, and I can say that they are really hot chicks, not as those in your class... miao; 31/5/08 17:23
Anonymous said...: why are you all talking about us instead of trying to continue the discussion in proper way? are you scared? are you able? i think that all of you is talking without knowing the argument.. you just re-write what somebody else said before..; 31/5/08 17:30
R0b said...: Please do not say to Bush thata we have petroleum in Basilicata or he will "export democracy" even to us!!!

hehehehe; 31/5/08 17:56
R0b said...: Vanessa you completely got the point, they're just repeating someoneelse words, not knowing anything, like the real cost and time of a nuclear plant ( infact considering pre-production and post-production nuclear costa, they'll be greater than the most of the sustainable ones 8-10 % more).
And they're talking about you because maybe they're not to do something else... I don't know...
and
believe me OUR CHICKS ARE THE BEST; 31/5/08 18:14
Anonymous said...: ok rob,assuming you are right, however you are talking about the costs, what about the ammount of energy created?
however changing a little bit argument, you can't use just a single value, out of the context, to prove your reasoning. Otherwise you are behaving as your italian politics . You should consider all the elements, pro & against, and then make the conclusion. Otherwise you are just doing disinformatia (or giving an uncomplete informarmation). I'm ready to change my idea, but you must be able to answer properly, giving a general opinion on what this beautiful country should do.; 31/5/08 19:49
Paoletta said...: guagliò!! già ho trovato difficoltoso identificare Giulio-Luigi-ISO9000...mo ci mancavano solo ste due lesbiche, Vanessa e Ludmilla...saranno mica le T.A.T.U (ve le ricordate: all the things she said, all the things she said...)?? mah...

PS: cmq siete na massa di arrapati!! :-))...emilià contieniti; 31/5/08 20:53
Emiliano said...: ah noi saremmo gli arrapati??? vabbè va...faccio finta di non aver letto...
Dear Ludmilla, Chernobyl is enough for saying stop to nuclear...I think you have no idea on what have been, are and will be the damages...no idea! most of all...How to debate with someone who is afraid to write his/her own name?; 31/5/08 21:16
Anonymous said...: we are not afraid to use our real names, coz we are using our real names!; 31/5/08 22:46
Anonymous said...: chernobyl is the demonstration of the comunism (or what was called comunism) failure!; 31/5/08 22:47
Anonymous said...: I love nuclear...it makes me feel fuckin' hot; 1/6/08 14:39
Rita said...: Scrivo in italiano per spiegarmi meglio.Sono contraria al nucleare per principio: il problema ambientale non è solo relativo ad eventuali "incidenti"(pensiamo alla Francia,indicata come modello di gestione "pulita" del nucleare-ma se in qsta gestione fossero considerati gli effetti dei test in Polinesia,i francesi verrebbero ancora osannati?).La lungimiranza e la "responsabilità sociale" per me sono motivi sufficienti per dire no al nucleare. Certo, se poi Ludmilla pretende di sostituire completamente (e in breve tempo) il consumo di petrolio con le res (en rinn), allora si parla di utopia. Nel breve periodo la dipendenza si può ridurre affiancando il gas alle res, invece che puntando sulle centrali, il cui tempo di realizzazione/"riqualificazione" è maggiore di quello necessario affinchè gli investimenti in res siano tali da ridurne il costo attualmente fuori mercato -parlo di 2/3 anni stimati-(Senza contare che,come per la tav, i termovalorizzatori, ecc, in Italia chi vorrebbe una centrale in casa propria? i tempi si dilaterebbero anc di più).Avete idea di quanti e quali benefici collaterali si possono ottenere attraverso questo flusso continuo e sistematico di innovazione?Nel lungo periodo si potrebbe ridurre sempre più il consumo di gas e petrolio fino a renderlo un consumo di nicchia: in qusto scenario il problema dipendenza non esisterebbe più perchè opec e gazprom non eserciterebbero più la stessa influenza di adesso. Una "transizione petrolifera" totale forse non è sostenibile stando agli attuali consumi (e credo che in un lontano futuro saremo costretti a ripensarli), ma sicuramente la riduzione della dipendenza con le res,sia nel breve che nel lungo periodo,credo che se POSSA FA'.; 1/6/08 19:33
silvia said...: rita sei la mejo...; 2/6/08 23:35
Anonymous said...: SLUTTY LUDMILLA AND FAGGOT VANESSA, LISTEN RITA AND SUCK IT ALL; 3/6/08 12:47
Anonymous said...: why are you so rude? we didn't offend anybody, we were just trying to do a constructive discussion on a very important issue. however it dosen't matter...
well, now, answering to Rita, we think that your optimistic view is much more utopistic than ours. Infact, do you think that is possible substitute efficiently petrol with renewables, but is not possible to build efficiently a nuclear plant. I think that this is a contradiction. Do you know that for example, at the present day, in Germany (where there is no sun) is much more convenient to invest in solar panels than in Italy(where you can find a lot of sun)? and in germany there are a lot of plants...
Our idea is based on the concept of Diversification. since italy depends a lot on energy and on petrol(the importation are more than 90% of need) it can be a good move in the short and in the long period. The same policy is applied in Germany were the target is now: 60% of renewables and 40% on nuclear.Infact at the moment renewables cannot completely fulfill the energy demand, then, for sure it would be the same in Italy (or even worse) that is not efficient as Germany. Diversification reduces the risks and gives the possibility to be really indipendent on energy.
Ps: sorry if I answer in english, but i don't feel very much comfortable with your language.
Pps: who is natasha? we are really interested to konw you...; 3/6/08 15:43
Emiliano said...: FORZA GAZPROM!!! scusate è una questione sentimentale....jejeje; 4/6/08 15:10
Anonymous said...: SIETE

UN

BRANCO

DI

C
A
Z
Z
O
N
I; 5/6/08 21:12
Rita said...: Care Vanessini&Ludmillini, mi sa che c'è stato un misundertanding. anche io sono pro diversificazione (solo che credo andrebbe puntata su rinn e gas almeno nel breve periodo) e non ho detto che il nucleare non è efficiente (però penso che si potrebbero ottenere risultati in tempo minore con le rinnovabili); ma preferisco le rinnovabili per tre ragioni: 1)non hanno lo stesso rischio ambientale(anche se minimo laddove ben gestito ecc ecc) del nucleare; 2)investire in rinnovabili significa investire in innovazione, tecnologia, ricerca, ecc e non so se lo stesso vale per il nucleare; 3)abbiamo le risorse (sole vento energia geotermica) belle pronte e nn le usiamo. Come sempre, sono disposta a stupirmi, ma anche nel caso in cui voi ci riusciate, sarò cmq pro rinnovabili e contro nucleare. E questo perchè ho una visione delle cose utopica..Beh mi fate un complimento.Preferisco essere idealista piuttosto che pensare che ci stiamo accontentando della soluzione più conveniente nel breve periodo, senza costruire nulla di buono da lasciare a quelli che verranno dopo di noi.Questa totale assenza di lungimiranza è l'atteggiamento che,a mio parere, ha ridotto l'Italia sul lastrico. Perciò sono idealista e me ne vanto. The moment you stop dreaming it's the moment you stop caring. (segue scroscio di applausi) :D
Quando volete ne parliamo in s8 ma qui chiudo perchè odio essere prolissa e già mi sto facendo noia da sola! ;); 5/6/08 23:23

EEBL - European Economy & Blogging in Liberty

THE INFORMER

2008/05/30

nucleare?

30 comments:

Labels

OUR LINKS

EEBL - European Economy & Blogging in Liberty