JustAnotherHun

More good news for environment and the fight against climate change:

While Germany shuts down it's last three NPPs and simultaneously re-activates old and dirty coal plants to avoid electricity shortage, Finnland starts Europe's most powerful reactor, providing 1.600 Megawatt in NPP Olkiluoto.

The new reactor will produce 14 percent of Finnland's electricity.

On 6/27/2022 at 8:57 AM, Namplik said:

Any update, did you buy a bike yet? 

Sorry for the late reply.

Yes, I bought it. Had to wait around four month to get it.

It took a bit time to "become friends" with the CBX because I drive big bikes with much more power back in Europe.

But for my needes in Thailand it's quite perfect ????

Sweden is a good example for an energy and environmental protection policy without the  ideological fanatism of the German Greeniban:

"According to current plans we will produce electricity until deep in the 2040ies and this even might not be the end of the plant." (Josef Nylen, speaker of Forsmarks Krafgrupp AB).

This opinion seems spported by the Swedish government, which plans to add further NPPs to the already existing six blocks:

"Sweden is on a shopping tour for new nuclear power plants"

and
"If we want to replace all this with electricity, then it is clear to us: this cannot be done with renewable energies alone. We need nuclear energy for that" (Ebba Busch, energy minister and deputy prime minister)

Right now, 30 percent of the Swedish electricity mix comes from NPPs. Until 2050 it's planed to rise to 50%.

Again Ebba Bush:
"Everybody who is willing to build new (nuclear) power plants in Seden is welcome"

Today Germany shuts down it's last three nuclear power plants
- though the need of electricity will increase by 40 percent until 2030
- though the country has the by far highest electricity prices in Europe
- though a majority wants either an extension for the last few NPPs (43%) or even a re-activation of already shut down NPPs (25%)  while only 28% support the final shutdown.

Let's have a look at other European countries :

Poland: No NPP right now, 2 NPPs are planed
Sweden: 6 NPPs, more are planed
Finnland: 2 NPPs, 2 more are planed
Czech Republic: 2 NPPs, one more planed
Slovakia: 2 under onstruction
Netherlands: lifetime extension fot existing NPPs, 2 new blocks planed
Belgium: lifetime extension until 2035
France: 56 NPPs with lifetime extension to 60 years, 8 more until 2035, further 8 are plaed until 2050
Spain: 7 NPPs lifetime until between 2027 and 2035
Hungary, Bulgaria, Slowenia, are planing ne NPPs
Italy and Romania are considering the construction of NPPs

All those countries have no idea how to manage energy and how to save the climate. History shows clearly, the German way always was and is the only right one. We're driving down the empty climate-highway and all the oncoming cars are ghost drivers.
Cheers ????

4 minutes ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Do you know if mutations occur in vaccinated people with breakthrough infections?

The term is "escape mutation".

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

 If you want to compare Sweden to the countries most similar to it, those would be Norway, Denmark, and Finland.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/sweden

The point is not how geographicly close countries are to each other but to compare very strict and lasting lockdowns countries to those with none or short ones.

Thailand should tell this scientific finding to the rest of the world as soon as possibvle.

31 minutes ago, ESLTeacher1989 said:

One of them looks pretty old (Probably worth 100k baht if sold second hand as an estimate), the other one looks like a fairly expensive SUV....which is really unfortunate but most of the damage is just on the roof so lets see what happens

Keep cool, it won't be a big deal.

23 minutes ago, Scott said:

You dismiss the quarantine requirements as a primary cause, but without those the spread would have been exacerbated. 

[...]

Pretty much every pandemic ended with a new 'normal', not the return to the old normal.  

 

 

 

Not quarantaine is responsible for the problems everywhere and the rising hunger in the third world. Quarantaining the infected makes sense to stop or at least slow down outbreaks. The damage was done by shutting down whole economies temporarily.

If you compare countries with very strict lockdowns to the few without long lockdowns, you'll see not much difference in the success to fight the virus. Take Germany and Sweden as examples.

Which pandemics are you refering to that ended with a new normal?

I'm double vaxxed and boostered.

As one of very few companies, we've managed to have our medical staff get vaxxed and boostered by 99% up to now. Many many single talks were needed to reach that level.

In June and July 2021 I worked once a week in one of Southern Bavaria's vaccination centers. I did not count the shots I set but there were many.

If  morons call me an antivaxxer, so be it.

10 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

My point is to vaccinate everyone possible so the virus dies out, or is confined to small pockets.

 

Like measles. And smallpox. And Polio.

 

yeah, I get it. You want to give up, even if millions more die.

 

if you had you way,  new and nastier variants will emerge from unvaccinated  hosts, and you will blame the vaccine.

To compare the vaccination against measles, polio and smallpox with Covid shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. If compare, then compare it to vaccination against flu.

 If the Covid vaccines are so protective, where will those "million more" deaths come from? Just vaxx the vulnerables again and again and again. Then they are save, according to the propaganda.

New variants? Ever heared about escape mutations?

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Okay, now I understand your point: let young people walk around infected, and if they happen to infect the “vulnerable”, well, that’s their tough luck.

And your point? Let the vaccinated who can catch and provide the virus walk around infected?

You have to accept that the virus will not disappear, no matter how many people are vaccinated. Life includes risks and ends with death.

If one wants to rule out even the last minimal risk, he will have to lock himself in permanently and avoid any social contact.

19 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Start by giving her all the pencils now.

Yes. It could be a life insurance ????

10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

What’s your point?

The point is that now, exactly like before, the 95% are the protection level right after the booster (plus 14 days, I think). It means close to nothing and it does, cannot, show how long the booster will provide an acceptable protection.

Don't get me wrong: I would recommend the booster for each vulnerable person. The elderly and those with underlying conditions.

But it does not make sense to booster (and maybe rebooster after 120 days - according to Biontech's Ugur Sahin) those with a very low risk of an infection with severe symptoms or even death. 

When I left Germany in Nov.21 after 1.5 years on the frontline, I swore not to discuss Covid on non-medical platforms anymore,  because many of the self entitled experts have a sadly limited capacity of remembering:

In 09 or 10/21 I reported from my practice of an outbrake in one of the homes for elderly where we provide medical services. I do not recall the numbers exactly. But the tenor was:

From 23 elderly, all of them doubble vaxxed by Biontech, some of them already boostered, 19 were infected, 3 transfered to an ICU and one died.

I was called a liar and defamed by a few fanatics, because at this time the myth was still alive that it would be very unlikely that "fully immunized" people could catch the virus and even get heavy symptoms. I don't know if my post survived the "fake news" and "misleading"-chants.

What I reported then is common sense now and I broke my oath, though knowing it better ????

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

Please provide a citation for the '20 days later the protection against infection was zero'.  I don't believe that is correct. 

You're right. It was a typing error. I corrected it already to 120

5 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Sorry, I took “!20 days” to mean 20 days, not 120 days.

My fault. The "!" was wrong written, I noticed it too late.

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You wasted our time with drivel about 2 shots of AZ being ineffective against Omicron, while ignoring the existence of boosters.

 

what point were you trying to make?

Teh zero protection after just 120 days was not related to omicron, but to delta.

The protection level of around 90% ore more was at 14 days after the 2. shot. 

Just now, Danderman123 said:

 I guess you have written off the 15%.

Reduce the 15% by those with underlying contitions and you come close to the risk a healthy man or woman faces to die from Covid.

12 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

T and B cell memory tends to last a very long time but neither you, the scientists or myself can predict the future can we?

In case of AZ it did not last that long after shot 2. 120 days later the protection against infection was ZERO.

True, we don't know. As we did not know the 95% (even reported in the early stages of the vaccination campaign) would decline more or less fast, according to the brand one took.

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Because the invulnerable get Covid and die, too.

 

Get vaccinated.

I am vaccinated and boostered ????

The not vulnerable have a very little risk to die from Covid. 85% of all victims are 70+.

How often do I have to repeat that until even a vaxxiban does understand?

9 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

I wanted to retire at age 18

If you wanted but did not, you've wasted your life.

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

No the 95% evidence by real world statistics. However as for your question, you tell me?

And for how long will that 95% protection last until the next booster has to be done?

95% protection of a risk that does only exist on a minimal level for people outside the vulnerable groups really makes much sense ????

12 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Things are getting pretty desperate for the anti vaxxers when they start arguing that 95% protection from death with a covid vaccine is not enough. I guess they've still got ivermectin to fall back on....lol

Ah, the 95% myth again. And for how long these 95% will last for people with a very small risk to die even without vaccination?