Raynesway in Derby i think is where there are a couple of naval reactors operating.

yes

Nice one Dave, welcome aboard!

Here here! Working on pre-fabbed "things" for HPC atm, yet Sizewell is only 1hr up the road from where i live. Once that kicks off, with a bit of lucky can get myself working on the project in a less "remote" way. Bradwell too, once that comes about.

@@kf8575 Do you think Bradwell B will go ahead?

That's literally what Rolls Royce is trying to do. Getting the government on board to actually buy them is far more problematic - it'll be the end result but they're screwing around more than a lil bit.

Hi there. You can check out our career opportunities here: www.edfenergy.com/careers

Any evidence to back up that claim?

@@marvintpandroid2213 he read it in a blog on the Internet, created by a member of the tinfoil hat brigade👍

That could be the spent flue from Sizewell A.

Country wasnt full of islamic militants 20yrs ago

There's always been armed police on all nuclear sites in the UK. Always. You might not have seen them, but they were there. The AEAC that preceded the CNC were established in 1955 and before that it was probably more of a military thing.

Hi there. The UK has used nuclear power since 1956 and has 8 power plants designed with these types of threats in mind. They have layers of extremely robust security. Nuclear is one of the most comprehensively regulated industries. ^Colin

Funny, I was thinking that, most marine life is cold blooded and prefers some heat, that's good for predators and their prey.

Every form of Thermal Power station including Solar Thermal uses steam turbines, so just a complex way of boiling water

I joined the CEGB just prior to privatisation. I'm pretty sure that it's chairman Lord Marshall; was an advocate of the PWR. Possibly because it was a proven design and as such more appealing to private investors. I believe Torness had originally been considered for an SGHWR but instead became the site for the last AGR to be built.

@@tomroland5467 I've never been a liker of light water reactors, but as you say that had the market, but required enriched fuel which costs , the CANDU SGHWR using natural uranium and the ability to burn up PWR used fuel as we know now I feel is much more elegant, that's just me and my own thoughs on it , plus on load refueling not having to dismantle the reactor to refuel

Do you think it is getting lonely since they closed Sizewell A?

@@derekp2674 Might be.

It's reasonably basic physics that is taught to most kids in school at a relatively young age so presumably they thought it wouldn't need to be - nuclear fuels like uranium emit neutrons, which are absorbed by other assemblies in the reactor to cause fission which causes them to emit fission products including neutrons, which are absorbed by even more assemblies which fission and so on in a chain reaction. Without a moderator like water this reaction would be a runaway self-sustaining reaction. It's more complex but that's the basic deal, other than the fuel itself you don't need to put anything in to cause the reaction to take place. Fusion reactors you have to inject high energy neutral particles because the reaction isn't self-sustaining, which is one of the reasons we like fusion reactors; they're not totally safe (they still emit neutrons which you have to shield against and deal with the damage that does to the materials the reactor is made of) but the non-self-sustaining part makes them safer in the event of catastrophic failures.

@@streaky81 Do you know of anything in life where energy is produced for 6 years without any input power whatsoever? I don't. It's too fantastical. The way you have just explained how nuclear reactors work defies the law of conservation of energy. What you get told in school is not always true!!! If you think I've got it wrong show me a demonstration of a chain reaction in a laboratory. Over to you!!!

@@PeterPete it doesn't defy any laws of physics at all, you just haven't understood them.

@@streaky81 incorrect imo simply because there is nothing in man's practical world that exhibits the kind of chain reraction dreamt up by nuclear physicists Does a kettle keep water boiling afterr you've switched the kettle off at the mains? Does a car engine keep running after you've run out of fuel or after you've switched the engine off? Does a wind turbine keep rotating when there is no wind? I can give you so many practical examples in real life where machines and devices need power to make them work and yet all you can give me is an example of energy production where you cannot demonstrate that they work in the manner you think they work. The way you think about this topic goes against practical everyday life experience! Where on earth do you live?? In a dreamworld most likely!

@@PeterPete diesel engines. Keep putting air and fuel in and the reaction sustains itself - with a net gain of useful power, but no energy gain because the energy is in the fuel: exactly like in a nuclear reactor. There are thousands of known self-sustaining reactions you'll find. That or it's the unicorns they strap into the reactor and force to run around in circles: could go either way.

What would happen. The idiots that designed Fukushima probably thought they thought of every disaster possible.

@@DXmYb A solar flare would shut down electronics. Some people think they are prepared. But a major solar flare would instantly kill any one on life support as circuits fried. Planes would fall from sky, nuclear plants would melt down a as how would emergency protocols kick in? No computers. A third world war could be started by a country setting off a nuke over a country. The EMP would shut down the country including most of the military.

@@vincitveritas3872 Thanks for replying. I've never researched solar flares. More nuclear disasters are a certainty. Interesting to see what will cause the next one. They are a great source of energy.

You are aware that all control systems have at least one back-up system, a final backup being a manually not remote operated system?

@@vincitveritas3872 not really, but that's literally why reactors have passive safety systems. Fukushima wasn't badly designed but it was very very old and they had been repeatedly warned by the US about the dangers at the plant and they chose to ignore those dangers. All the potential issues with nuclear reactors are well known and understood, and can be in almost all instances trivially mitigated. You just have to chose to do it; which in that instance was a matter for the Japanese regulator.

the Magnox Nuclear Power program stopped building nuclear power stations long ago, they are only decommissioning them now

Cant build at home? It's not that they "cant", it's more that they wont. European labour equals cheap labour. Screw the British tradesmen over, yet again.

We can build them, maybe outsourcing is cheaper.

@@davidturnbull310 kinda - it's more that the best manufacturers with all the really important patents for example may only have factories in France (looking at you, GE). We can build steam turbines, it's not that hard but you have companies that are very good at it and highly experienced that will sell you a steam turbine at a reasonable price, in quick time and of high quality. It isn't just a price issue.

When you privatise an industry companies from abroad can move in and buy it up, that is how capitalism works. If you've ever voted Tory in your life then you are partly to blame for the lack of industry in this country as it was all nationalised and untouchable under Labour until 1980.

Erm, no

The history is exactly why it's worth the risk, we've had clean air and no accidents since the first reactors came online in the 50's.

You don’t have a clue what your on about lol. Poor work ethics haha.. how are we the 5th largest economy you numb skull

@@Largeandincharge22 dream on

Yes, Mr Chinese propaganda bot......

@@Largeandincharge22 Because you treat your workforce as disposable.

China is touching the poor souls in its ‘re-education’ camps with a lot of barge poles; some of them electric baton barge poles.

The adults are too busy running the reactor.