50 posts • joined Monday 16th November 2009 20:20 GMT
Employed by the BPA perchance?
The message above sounds like someone who wants us to believe that what the parking companies do is legal.
Quick fact: when you park on any private land, any debt is with the LAND OWNER, not their agent. In this case, the parking company are the AGENT and have no legal standing to chase the debt.
I doubt a supermarket would chase after someone for overstaying in a free car park.
Not if they wanted to retain any customers that is...
I've got a non-touch Windows 8 laptop (high spec cos I perform Monte carlo calcs on it) and I wish I had bought W7 instead.
I really miss the Start menu. It was my single port of call for all my programs. I listed them all. Now I have to open a search box and type in the name (if I remember what it was) to get to my program (especially the former built in ones, like calc or paint!)
Viewing photographs is also a pain. I open the photo, and get the metro application opening. I minimise it, and it's gone! Nothing in the task bar, so I have to go to Explorer and open the photo again.
Sometimes, and I don't know whether this is the computer itself, or Windows, but I am using the trackpad and I suddenly get the widget/gadget/whatever thing appearing at the side of the screen. WTF? All I did was move teh mouse pointer to another part of the screen (and not the corner either!).
All in all, I find Windows 8 to be very frustrating. I can't find anything and the reliance on a Microsoft account is also annoying.
I give it a couple of months...
and then we'll have the dreaded "Insufficient Storage Available" error.
Thanks to all the crap that Samsung have installed over Android, this may happen faster, depending on how many updates there are to the installed crapware.
I got 6 months out of my Note before I got this error. I regularly have to delete apps to update others. I now can't update anything because of this error, yet my phone is inisting that it has 240MB device memory available, 5.14GB available on internal memory and 11.16GB available on the 16GB SD card.
Yes, I'm moaning about my phone, but because Google's engineers are stupid, the S4 will fall foul of this error.
Re: Licenses 'sold'.
I'm one of those who has bought a license for Windows 8 Pro. I bought a shiny new laptop (and I had the choice, Windows 7 or Windows 8) oodles of memory, a fast processor and Windows 8.
What a mistake.
As soon as I log in, I press 'Win+D' to get to the desktop.
My wireless doesn't log in to the network unless I'm at the desktop, I can't find some of the programs I used to use, like Paint or the calculator unless I type the names into the search bar, the damn touchpad thinks that I want to open the settings widget or whatever it is that brings up the clock whenever I swipe my finger across the pad...
Need I go on?
The Start screen is a hodge podge of different sized tiles, with every program I've installed appearing there, most of the time, more than once. No apps seem to work when I download them from the Windows store (to be fair, that may be my fault)
I've tried to like Win 8. I got it deliberately to try and like it, but it is just a mess. I'm now 4 months into Windows 8 and I wish I'd stayed with 7.
Oh, the laptop doesn't havea touchscreen, and will soon be connected to a telly as my monitor. Tell me again how good Win 8 is as a touch driven device when I'm 10 feet away from my telly?
Re: The first movie of the reboot did it for me....
You could create a singularity (or black hole) out of the earth and the moon and other planets would all still orbit at the same distance they did before.
It's not the singularity that is the problem, it is the mass of the thing that became the singularity that is the issue.
Going back to the earth, according to NASA, if we compress all of it's mass into a sphere the saize of a marble, it would become a black hole. The moon and all the satellites orbiting the earth would carry on their merry way, with no ill effects whatsoever.
Us on the other hand...
Sorry for the long period between posts.
Anyway, I have had to delete more apps now, just to update a couple more apps on the phone. Internal storage is saying 243MB free out of a total space of 1.97GB, USB storage (internal memory) is 5.84GB free and the flash card has 11.22GB free. So why do I have to keep on deleting apps just to update others???
I've seen other posts asking about this error and I don't see why I, as a user, should have to root my phone to fix something that shouldn't be broken in the first place.
Just Google for "Insufficient storage available" and see how many hits you get. Then see how many Google engineers respond to those calls for help (answer: NONE that I've seen!)
My wife has just got an iPhone 5. THAT knows how to install apps when there is space on the device to do it.
What the article doesn't say...
is that the pirates who downloaded the crippled copy took to complaining,on the company forums no less, that they couldn't get any profits [i]because of piracy in the game[/i]!
Have a look at the article on arstechnica (sorry for the blatant plug) to get the full story.
P.S. I know that the italics don't work, they are there for emphasis...
Cloud storage? Not for me, or my company
Okay, so you've got your shiny subscription linked to your Microsoft account, and you need to do some work at home. No problem, I'll just pop it on my USB drive and take it home to work on.
Get home, open in your shiny version of Word 2013.
A copy gets saved in your MS account 'somewhere in the world'.
You get a knock at the door at 6am:
"I am arresting you for the transmittal of export controlled data to country XXX, you do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence..."
Think I'm joking? Many businesses allow you to work from home. Many of these companies are working with data that falls under the remit of "Export Control Regulations". You are personally liable for any data that you have, and your MS account stores files, metadata and other data on servers in various countries. So no more working from home (not a bad thing) for me at least.
Epic Google Fail!
Rebooting doesn't fix it and I don't see why I should have to root my phone or run another app just to free up some space to update my existing apps.
The phone should just work! I shouldn't have to do anything special just to update an app.
It's just shoddy coding. Why none of the tech websites have investigated this I don't know.
Maybe they're afraid of Google removing their page rankings privelidges or something.
Insufficient Storage Available - El Reg should investigate!
Those of you with Android phones will have probably seen this at one point or another, generally when you are updating one of your apps. I used to have 80+ apps installed on my Galaxy Note, but, due to this error, I have had to reduce it to just under 60. Yet, when I look at my usage of the storage on the phone, out of the 1.97GB total space, I have 347MB available, and the 11.07GB 'USB storage', shows I have 6.58GB available. I'm not going to quibble about the 16GB I should have on the phone, but still, I shouldn't have to delete anything. I HAVE SPACE!
I'm no slouch when it comes to computers and Linux (hell, I used to be a RHCT) but I don't see why I should have to delete my apps, just to update some of them! As a consumer, I shouldn't have to delete anything if my phone has enough storage space (6GB FFS!!!!). From what I've read, this is down to the Google engineers partitioning of the OS only leaving a small amount of space for the Apps folder.
Is this an epic fail along the lines of Bill Gates and his '640k is enough for anyone'?
Everyone raves about how good Android is, yet they fail to mention this error. Surely a responsible publication, such as the Register, should conduct an investigation into this and give us some solutions that don't involve 'rooting' our devices or playing around with apps that mask the problem by moving installed apps around.
I hate to say it, but I may just get a Windows phone next time if this error isn't fixed (apparently Windows and iOS don't suffer from this problem).
Re: It's egg-on-face time again! - not
Unless home users give up on Windows altogether and go with a tablet that isn't Surface or Surface Pro, what else is there in your local PC World that isn't Windows?
What people on here seem to forget, is that the great mass of people out there, who use computers, couldn't give a flying wotsit about whether their computer runs Windows or not. All they care about is being able to connect to Facebook, check emails, do IM and play their games.
We may be moving away from the tower system towards laptops and tablets, but the vast majority of people in the world couldn't even tell you what an operating system is, let alone that Windows is the OS they use. They will just see Windows 8 and think that it is automatically better than Windows 7 and use it.
Here's a simple challenge for you. Find 20 people (maybe your less computer savvy work colleagues) and ask them what browser they use to connect to the internet. I bet over half would say "Windows".
I rest my case m'lud.
Why so surprised?
When I was doing my degree (in Sheffield back in the early 90s - hell, I'm old!) our Astronomy professor postulated a theory that the planets in the solar system accreted material at different rates.
Thos in the inner solar system accreted material earlier than the outer solar system. His theory was that Pluto was a relatively young planet (at that time, it was still a planet) and may still have been actively, but slowly, accreting material. He also theorised that the Oort Cloud and Kuipier belts were simply going to form planets in millions of years time, they just hadn't had the time yet.
Looking at the gist of this report, simply lends a little more authority to his arguments. Maybe...
Re: Nostradamus said!
So, when will we get the doomsayers predicting the END of the solar system, because of the plutonium in the RTG exploding and causing the hydrogen and helium in Saturn to explode in a HUGE THERMONUCULAR EXPLOSION?
I would get my coat, but it was toasted in the fireball...
Parking Charge Notices - NOT fines
As another poster has said, there are not 'fines' just charges for parking on private property. If you haven't registered your details, then all they can do is issue speculative invoices based on some 'questionable' request to the DVLA to get the registered keepers details.
I for one will not be registering with them. If they want to try and chase me for some unenforcable Parking Charge Notice, then they can waste their money on postage.
Re: The Guardians Solution
Loads of hot air on that 'debate' anyway. No wonder the planet is heating up!!
One comment caught my eye: 'Copy Germany' I almost had tea coming out of my nose at that one.
Plant windmills and rely on leccy from abroad? I'd think that our policy makers are more intelligent than that! Oh, wait....
Re: Who didn't know this was coming!?!
"The latest generation of nukes are overly complicated and overly expensive, as events in Finland and France have demonstrated, and personally I think the engineers need to be sent back to the drawing board to design a cheaper, simpler, genuinely failsafe system."
Only the French EPR is overly complex. Having reviewed both designs (EPR and AP1000), I came away very impressed by the AP1000's simplicity. The AP1000 uses passively safe systems. Basically, if the smelly stuff hits the fan, it is designed to automagically shut down and be safe, without any human or active control system intervention for 48 hours. The EPR requires multiple active safety systems to do the same thing.
Yes, the PBMR is a good design, but it is a Gen IV design, rather than a Gen III+, like the AP1000 or EPR. This basically means that the pilot studies have been done, the concept is proven in a laboratory setting, but they haven't sorted out how to make the commercially viable solution yet. The South Africans were trying, but decided to shut down their project through lack of cash.
Re: It's not a one off fee
Yeah, but if you've only got one computer, it is still $99 per year.
We have two, but I don't run Office on mine because I don't need to.
So it is not worth it for the one computer that runs Office in my house.
YMMV, but how many households have 5 computers that they USE Office on? I don't mean the media PC you have connected to the telly, but PCs actually used for Office-like tasks. At most, there are 2 or 3 (depends on how many kids you've got I suppose).
So, at $99 per year, MS would have to release the next version of Office in 2016 (likely), and not change the pricing, for it to be worth buying the subscription for 3 computers.
For me, it isn't worth it.
It's not a one off fee
The fee is $99 per year, not $20.
From what I've seen Office is $139 for the home version, so in less than 18 months, paying by subscription will cost you more than the shrinkwrapped version.
I also doubt there'll be many 'extras' thrown in either. Isn't that what MS said about Vista and 7 Ultimate? What extras did you get after you'd bought the product?
2013 Q2 results? Have I just entered a temporal rift (yes I am a Trekker!) or is it el Reg?
Emergency calls only, but the web works
On a Samsung Galaxy Note with no voice, no texts but data works fine.
Wifi is turned off and I don't enable bluetooth, so something is going on...
Oh, the phone is showing HSPDA:9 with a signal strength of -107dBm 3asu (whatever they mean).
Service state is out of service but I am connected to the network...
SSDs? Too expensive for what you get...
I've just done a cost comparison between various SSDs and traditional hard drives available on Ebuyer.
Up to £50
250GB WD Hard drive - £49.05 (19.6p/GB)
60GB OCZ Agility 3 - £49.98 (83.3p/GB)
About the £250 mark (or 3TB)
3TB Seagate Barracuda HDD (1 year warranty) - £114.99 (3.8p/GB)
3TB Hitachi Ultrastar HDD (5 year warranty) - £276.65 (9.2p/GB)
240GB Kingston HyperX SSD (3 year warranty) - £275.15 (114.6p/GB)
If I want storage, then I'll go for the 3TB drives. Having to pay over 10 times the price per GB (compating the Hitachi with the Kingston) just for speedier access seems to me to be ridiculous! If I'm going to be playing a game for a few hours, what does an extra few seconds loading time matter?
Sorry, but SSDs don't offer me anything in the cost/benefit ratio that will convince me to change. Certainly, capacity wise, they are rubbish, and that is all I'm concerned about.
Maybe this is going to offend the technophiles among you, but why not launch a (small) series of test baloons and see how long it takes to get up to launch (or burst) altitude.
You can then have a very simple timer set to go off at a few thousand feet below burst height to launch LOHAN.
It saves on having a relatively heavy pressure measuring instrument and use a cheap gold plated watch as the timing mechanism :)
Exams ARE esier
I did my GCSEs in 1990 and A levels in 1992. Even then, we had to have extra maths lectures in the first year of University (Sheffield) to 'bring us up to the expected standard' for our Physics course.
A few years later, I tried my hand at being a physics teacher. The head of department had his own notebook, where he had done his plan for the A level physics syllabus when he first started teaching 25 years earlier. Over a quarter of the book had red crosses through it because it was no longer taught.
When I did my exams, the syllabus and the exams themselves were set by the Universities (JMB in my case). So there was a definite progression and you could see where they were going. GCSE->A Level->Degree etc. Now, it's all about the league tables.
Standards are falling, our politicians just don't want to admit it.
It's the same old problem
We develop a massive manufacturing base, then sell out the tech and the jobs to other countries.
Result: Trains are build in Germany/Italy wherever, car firms are bought by the Germans/Chinese and production shifted to those countries, our aerospace industry is 'encouraged' to become so bloated and lazy that the cheapest option is to merge them all and then kill off all investment in manned aircraft and airliners.
I could go on, but you see my drift.
The UK had the biggest manufacturing base in the world for a good few years in the years before the 20th Century, but we got lazy. The fat cats had 'silver service lunches', the unions decided that damaging the product, damaging the brand, and their own self interest was more important than getting the product out of the door. The result? Expensive, poorly produced products that the public turned their backs on. Why do we all drive foreign cars? Cos they are well built (generally), reliable and cheap.
I refer people to the book "Empire of the Clouds" for a good look at why our aero industry failed, just when it should have been prospering.
But, to come back to my earlier point, we always sell to the highest bidder, and that bidder doesn't have the UK's best interest at heart. Why else are the vast majority of our energy supplies held by foreign companies? We sell to make a quick buck and sod the consequences!
Re: Are they?
I wonder whether MS are releasing RT just to try to kill the ARM tablet market.
We know it won't run anything apart from crippled MS apps, but Joe public will be looking to install their existing software on a tablet. The cry will become "but it's Windows, so it should work!"
To which the PC World drone will say, "Well sir, here is an Intel tablet which WILL load your software"
Windows RT is Microsoft's attempt to kill the ARM tablet marketplace.
Not a flight sim
Okay, so this is going to get up people's noses, but on all of the marketing that MS has put out, there hasn't been mention of the 's' word - Simulator
It is being marketed as a game, pure and simple. If you want simulation, go with FSX or one of the other flight sims (read PCPilot for a list of the good ones).
Flight just seems to be a free game and MS will get the money back because everyone will want to fly around their house. Little realising that FSX has their house already loaded and lots of planes too.
Yes, I have downloaded it, but I was disappointed to find that it is only 32-bit. FSX was touching the limit of 32-bit systems and I was expecting the next flight game/sim from MS to be 64-bit.
Oh well, I guess that's what happens when you fire all of your best coders.
So if the supervision was so bad, how are these problems being noticed?
Have you heard of the GDA process?
Ever looked at the HSE Nuclear website?
We (the UK) have one of the most rigorous inspection regimes in the world, because, instead of having to meet a standard to get a tick in the box, our regulators expect the manufacturers and operators to get the tick in the box and then justify why the tick is deserved. They then have to make the risk and consequence as low as reasonably practicable. A principle enshrined in the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.
Our nuclear regulators have the power to stop any and all operations at a nuclear site if the operations are not safe. A power they have threatened operators with on a few occasions (for an operating site, every day spent off-line means 1million in lost profit).
When they are building to the same (give or take) design as will be built in the US and probably here as well, with oversight from the design team and inspections by the NRC (to see how they're getting on), then I don't see the Chinese CAP1000 as being a problem.
Only your unfounded hatred of the nuclear industry is blinding you to the fact that nuclear is needed and the AP1000 is the safest design yet. (Yup, flame bait. Heh!)
Actually, the loan was pulled because forgemasters had no business plan to actually produce anything using that loan. I wouldn't use the French EPR as the benchmark, look at what the Chinese are doing with the CAP1000, they are starting to pull ahead of schedule.
Clean up bill
Actually, the clean up bill is factored into the cost of producing the electricity from these plants.
It's a requirement from the Office for Nuclear Regulation that the plants are designed with decommissioning in mind using the technology available TODAY and costings for the decommissioning activities are factored into the overall running costs of the plant (and hence the electricity price).
@ Ben 50: So inaccurate it's comical
I've had a look at that website and it is publishing fairy tales as fact.
20mSv/yr is the internationally accepted dose rate LIMIT for nuclear workers. Dose rates to the public have to be below 1mSv/yr or, to put it bluntly, much less than the background radiation dose you get from living.
No government in the world would allow the 20mSv dose rate for the public.
1 additional cancer for every 100 girls? I'd love to see their analysis! Internal or external dose? Ingestion, inhalation or contaminated wounds? What nuclide is giving the dose?
Like I said above, fairy tales!
Oh, have you tried to look beyond the media? Nearly everything about the nuclear industry in this country is in the public domain. Only details that compromise the security of the plant, or the country are classified.
Face it Ben, you don't know what you're talking about. (and neither does that site you linked to either)
ALARP not ALARA
ALARA is an American invention and has no legal standing in the UK.
ALARP is the principle, enshrined in the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act, where a risk has to be reduced to As Low As Reasonably Practicable. So, spending thousands of pounds on a beach in Scotland to reduce the risk from next to nothing, to nothing, is way beyond ALARP.
I had to smile when the quote from SEPA included an "alpha ray". Never heard of that. Any ideas what it is?
An alpha particle I've heard of, and outside the body, it's of no consequence. Inside is another matter however... (depending upon how many particles you're dealing with of course)
Ever heard of vitrification?
Fast breeders? (very small and high power density, didn't produce much HLW).
All of the above were designed to reduce the amount of long lived highly active waste produced by the reactors. The new EPR and AP1000 reactors are designed to minimise wastes as much as possible given todays technology.
They are designed with decommissioning in mind and the costs of decommissioning are factored into the costs of the build and operation. In fact, in the past, the nuclear industry had a decommissioning fund. I've heard that a certain chancellor turned PM raided it not long after coming to power. How true that is, I don't know, but I have heard the story from a number of sources.
Let's face it, most of the stuff that is consigned as LLW (about 97% of the waste by volume) could go to landfill because it isn't radioactive anyway. It's just been in the reactor, or close to it, so it is designated as LLW automatically, "just in case".
And what do we do when it's dark and the wind isn't blowing?
Batteries? Nah, have you any idea how big the battery would need to be to power the average house for 8 hours of darkness? Also, how much will it cost? 22 million homes with solar panels and wind turbines on every one?
It'd bankrupt an already bankrupt economy.
A jumbo has about the same structural integrity as your average car. How much damage is done to a concrete wall when your car hits it?
Have you seen the test of a Phantom being thrown into a reactor containment vessel?
Remember that the only really solid objects in a plane are the engines. The Phantom had two, closely spaced. The Jumbo has 4, widely spaced, therefore the impact energy is distributed over a larger area.
Lots of uneducated FUD here
Okay, for all of you out there that are dead against nuclear, I ask you a question:
What will you use for reliable low carbon electricity generation in 10 years time?
Wind? Nope, can't rely on it 24/7 and it takes up a huge amount of space for a large (gigawatt) installation.
Tidal? Reliable, yes, but is the technology sufficiently advanced to build multi-gigawatt installations around the coast? And what about the environmental implications?
Solar? Erm, we live in the UK, not Spain. You'll get about 50-60% of what Spain can produce.
Hydro? Very reliable, but are we going to build new reservoirs? No, Greenpeace and FOE won't let you.
Geothermal? Hmmm, how far will we have to drill and can you guarantee that there won't be any consequences when the high pressure steam 'lubricates' existing fault lines (see Blackpool Earthquakes and Fracking for more info).
Wave? Maybe, but is the technology mature enough for gigawatts of installations around the coast?
Nuclear? Yes, reliable base load generation with mature technologies. The risks are known, the environmental releases are (in the UK at least) heavily regulated, the operations of the plants have to be approved by the regulator and the cost of decommissioning the new plants is factored into the cost of electricity that they are going to produce.
Now, I'm not saying that any of the above shouldn't be implimented. What I'm saying is that we need a mix.
Wind is great when the wind is blowing, but the load factor is only 30% at best. So your 1GW installation over the course of a year, will only produce an average of 300MW.
What do you do for the other 700MW? Fire up a gas fired station.
The country, as LP rightly says, is going to become more and more heavily dependant on electricity. If they want to reduce the fossil fuel consumed in transport, then that means electric cars. How do they get the electricity for the cars? It has to be generated reliably.
One solution, to reduce the number of new installations required, will be for every home/office/building in the country to have solar panels and microgeneration wind turbines installed by law. However, the cost would be astronomical, and the NIMBYs would come out in force against it.
Face it, nuclear is the only, low carbon, high energy density, reliable base load generation option we have at the moment. It is needed and it is safe.
Have fun flaming, I'll answer any flames as best I can.
1) maybe correct, but did you actually read how much they'd detected? The same level as normal background plutonium. So nothing much to get excited about.
2) Bigger than Chernobyl? What rubbish have you been reading? Oh yes, you included a couple of blog posts and a link to the Daily Mail (that considers EVERYTHING to be bad for you!) Large area lost to human habitation? Nope, wrong again. Rainfall will disperse that activity until you won't be able to detect it in a year or two's time.
3) "When melted fuel hits water", oh don't make me laugh even more! The fuel is IN the water now. Why do you think they are pouring 7 tonnes of water per hour in there?
4) What fuel elements converted to dust and blown away? When? do you not think that other country's would be able to detect all of this supposed failed fuel? Nope, what they are detecting now is not the fuel elements.
5) This is wrong on so many levels it isn't true. At least try and look for facts not fairy tales when writing comments.
Not in normal landfill...
Wrong, Low Level Waste gets sent to Drigg and stored in ISO containers at great expense.
It reminds me of the bottled water that can't be poured down a power station's non-active drains system because it will put them over their discharge limits.
I assume you're joking
I certainly took that as a joke.
A million people?
Oh, yes, that's just the normal death toll over the last 20-odd years in Russia isn't it?
Directly attributable to Chernobyl? Give me a break.
Cover up? Where?
Can you let me know where I can find the position of 'Chief Cover up artist' in the nuclear industry? How many organisations try to bash nuclear?
Give me a figure for all of this money that is spent by the nuclear industry on covering up bad news and I'll point you to the greenies spending much much more on falsifying scientific data to fit their own 'ideas'.
The nuclear industry deals in facts. We leave the story telling to Greenpeace and their ilk.
You don't know me...
So how can you say I'm corrupt.
I say you are a perverted child molester. Does that make it true? Statistically, given the numbers of people who read El Reg, then I could be telling the truth.
The fact is, I don't know you and you don't know me.
I work in the "corrupt and rotten" nuclear industry and I am yet to falsify any data or results just because the client won't like it. In fact, when I interview people, I ask them if they have ever had to compromise their integrity, i.e. lie, to get the job done.
What is the eminently foreseeable risk you are talking about? The M9.0 earthquake, which the station survived, or the tsunami, which was twice the height that had been predicted? Who's fault is that? Not the reactor designers. They can only design to parameters that they have been told. Most of the tsunami defences around Japan were overtopped that day. I don't hear you complaining about that (a fact that directly caused thousands of deaths).
So Ben, if we don't have nucs, what shall we have? Coal? Gas? Oil? Wind? Solar? Wave? Tidal? Hydro?
Coal, gas and oil emit Co2, and consume an expensive resource. Wind doesn't always blow, so you need CO2 emitting stations to back it up. Solar, not viable in the UK. Wave and tidal are still in development, and can't match what we need. Hydro can, but how many more dams will we have to build and valleys will we have to flood before we are self sufficient?
Put bluntly, this was not a disaster. It could have been if the Japanese hadn't got water over the fuel. I deal in radiation shielding and radiological consequences, so I think I know what I'm talking about when I say that the releases, such that they have been, will be dispersed before they enter the food chain and the dose rates that we are seeing on the site (2mSv/hr) is probably scattered radiation from the fuel ponds (scattered from the building structure and the air).
Oh, and I resent being called a liar by someone who obviously doesn't know what they are talking about. Feel free to comment back. I'm looking forward to a one sided debate.
Some facts from someone in the industry...
There's a lot of talk about terrorists getting hold of the reactor/fuel and setting off a bomb, but, the reactor itself has a reactor vessel that is probably 6-12" thick (it has to be to withstand the pressure) so it would have to be a mightly large shaped charge to breach that! Additionally, if they did, somehow, manage to get to the fuel, they would be dead in seconds if they tried to handle it.
The reactor vessel also would weigh somewhere in the region of 100 tonnes. So it wouldn't be easy to remove from the ship anyway. Even in an explosion of LNG, the reactor would be designed to fail-safe (yes, even a gas explosion can't outrun the trip switches to shut down the reactor).
Oh and to reply directly to Robert Hill:
1) The pressures are more than likely to be similar to a commercial PWR. After all, it will be a smaller reactor than Sizewell B (3000+MWth), producing much less power, so it follows that the pressures will be similar to or less than that.
2) How are they going to go unstable? Remember, they are Pressurised WATER Reactors, on a ship that floats on a sea of, well, water... And how many coolant accidents have there been on commercial plants (much bigger and more powerful plants BTW), three? Four? (Sellafield fire, 1957, TMI 1979, Chernobyl 1986...)
3) No argument there.
4) Ditto, but you must remember that that was Russia. I can guarantee that the regulators would never let a nuclear powered ship anywhere near the EU if it's operators were not trained to the same or better standards as the Civil nuclear operators.
5) See answer to 4.
6) Look up the Devil Core on wikipedia. Just an instant (less than a second) of exposure to a criticality incident killed one and injured a few more. How are we going to get the highly radioactive fuel out of the reactor without irradiating anyone within 20 yards? I would also bet that any merchie powered by a nuclear reactor would have some means of defending itself.
Despite all that, I don't think that it will be viable. The insurance alone would cost more than a years worth of revenue... Good idea to float, but like the nuclear powered plane, it will ever get off the ground... (badum tish).
Actually, I find it very useful
Non-intuitive? Unfriendly? I think it is very useful, not only for calculating PAYE and NI contribs, but keeping a record of it for you easily. The last version (2009) was not good, but 2010's CDROM worked brilliantly. No problems filling in all of the records and it submitted everything for me with no problems at all.
Yes, it's written in Flash (I think) but it runs on Widoze, Mac and Linux. What other piece of tax software does that?
Hmm, geography not your strong point?
In the UK all of our nuclear plants are located by the sea or in tidal estuaries, not on rivers. Very reliable, unless global warming dries out the seas of course...
So THAT's what happened!!!
I had the same thing happen to my XP partition a few months ago. I'm looking to get it reinstalled (along with 7 and Fedora 13) in a few weeks.
I too ask the question, why did 7 mess about with my XP install?
Better late than never
Well, this MinWin thing has been batted around for years. I remember a long time ago, being told that it woul dbe included in the version of Window after Vista, instead we get Vista SP2 masquerading as Win 7.
Don't get me wrong, I'm using Win 7 as the OS on top of which I've installed FF3.5 adn it does work, but I have not noticed any speedups when clicking on the Start menu, in fact, I think it is quite sluggish to respond to click on the start menu. Vista, on the same hardware actually 'seems' faster.
Of course, I'm just about to reboot to perform an upgrade to the real operating system on this computer, if the servers have the capacity that is...
Andy (F12 here I come!)
@Nigel11 - agreed. Wind power is one of the biggest red herrings ever. We have a large coastline and some of the fastest tides in the world. Why not use tidal power? Absolutely predictable, no blights on the landscape for birdies to fly in to and a much higher power density than air!
@AC - nuclear power stations are designed for load factors that wind turbines can only dream of; 90+%. It's called reliable base load generation. Unlike a wind turbine, which only has a load factor of, AT BEST, 35% nuclear power has a smaller physical footprint, higher energy density and a more reliable delivery.
@AC (10/11 - 13:17) - Nice illustration of the split personality of the greens there: Spain somehow generates 50% of it's power from wind turbines, yet nuclear power in the UK only generates 4%? Try looking up your facts: nuclear power in the UK generates about 20% of our TOTAL electricity demand. Wind power in Spain generated 50% of their NIGHT-TIME demand. Not total, peak time demand, night time demand, when the power draw on the grid is at it's lowest. Typical greenie, always selecting the figures that you want without giving ALL of the facts.
We need a mix of reliable base load generation (yes, including nuclear) along with clean renewables. But the mix is wrong. Water (i.e. tidal power), not wind is the way to go.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire