Nuclear Sarko-Sego debate 17 50%% against: the facts

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
frog
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 24/02/07, 18:57
Location: Normandy




by frog » 04/05/07, 22:36

In this fight evil, I believe that EAMS has an edge because it was environment minister!
0 x
frog
jeanv
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 1
Registration: 01/06/07, 20:14

We may be worried




by jeanv » 01/06/07, 20:19

When we know the little knowledge about nuclear energy, we understand better that we are not leaders in new energies.

Hopefully things will change.
0 x
User avatar
pollux
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 164
Registration: 07/05/06, 23:08
Location: Paris
x 1




by pollux » 02/06/07, 14:11

me there is something that scares me a little, is that despite the fact that Jancovici has maché the work to the journalists, I saw nothing or heard after this debate on the real figures and on who was right or wrong ...

it amazes me a lot, because journalists are usually excellent shit digs and two candidates who plant themselves in style on a similar subject, it should have given great echoes.
it seems to me that even the chained duck, which is one of the newspapers that spits the most on politics and does not lose an opportunity to light them, did not react ... unless it happened to me without me seeing it ... did someone see something in the press?
0 x
criticism is necessary, but the invention is vital because in any invention there is a criticism of the convention ...
SixK
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 669
Registration: 15/03/05, 13:48
x 272




by SixK » 02/06/07, 18:14

Bof, anyway, the trap was awkwardly stretched and even turned against its installer! :)

Who still cares! ??? Sarko has won the story's end.

SixK
0 x
User avatar
abyssin3
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 623
Registration: 18/07/05, 15:12




by abyssin3 » 03/06/07, 02:35

When I saw the debate, there were several things that shocked me:
1-The 17% of Sego was particularly low. Normal, it corresponds to the world value (*) not French ... Which still means that Sego had learned about the thing. Wrong, certainly, but informed all the same.
2-The 50% retorted by sarko, which did not correspond to anything. Which makes me think more that he dropped this figure because we have always boasted in France of having more than half of our energy from nuclear. And I imagine he dropped that number out of caution. But that means that he did not inquire more than on "we say".
According to EDF, it is 78%. In other words, none of the two presidential candidates (who signed the NH ecological pact) know the share of nuclear power in France. Perhaps no more now than at the time of debate.
And it's one of them who will make the decisions about the environment ...
: Shock: : Shock: : Shock:

(*) Source: wikipedia therefore unreliable.
Last edited by abyssin3 the 03 / 06 / 07, 02: 49, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
abyssin3
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 623
Registration: 18/07/05, 15:12




by abyssin3 » 03/06/07, 02:42

Grenouille wrote:In this fight evil, I believe that EAMS has an edge because it was environment minister!

Minister of the environment and not knowing the share of nuclear energy in France (while even SNCF touted its nuclear TGV ...), it's still pretty strong ...
When you say "In this fight of bad", I find the term in bold well chosen.
I would even say bad with a big M.
0 x
SixK
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 669
Registration: 15/03/05, 13:48
x 272




by SixK » 03/06/07, 04:05

abyssin3 wrote:According to EDF, it is 78%. In other words, neither of the two candidates for

According to EDF it's 81% in fact, that's what is marked on my bill. :)
The 3% difference must come from the competition which does not use nuclear power.
Perhaps 78% would be the correct figure.

SixK
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 288 guests