Thailand Opts To Build Nuclear Power Plant

[caf]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Your blimp example is amusing but that is all it is.

There will be no debate among the Thai people. There will be talks about commissions though.

Are the Thais safety conscious ? I think not and that would make me restless for sure.

[Donnyboy]

And last but not least where they get the money for a nuclear plant, the investment is sky high.

I realy do think that there are much more urgent needs for this country than a nuclear power plant.

hmm, so you would prefer blackouts due to power shortages?

Thailand needs to act soon before there is a power shortage. These power plants take time to build. If its anything like the Swampy airport, we not even see one built in our generation

[Donnyboy]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Your blimp example is amusing but that is all it is.

There will be no debate among the Thai people. There will be talks about commissions though.

Are the Thais safety conscious ? I think not and that would make me restless for sure.

possibly not debate, but a rabble once they find out where the nuke plant is located

[heykki]

"59 per cent voiced out against the nuclear power plant and 66 per cent didn't want the establishment in their communities."

If someone is still "slow" enough not to understand this sentence, let me make it clear for you. Part of that 66 % voted FOR the nuclear power plant, but just didn't want it in their community.

I also found the "nuke1.pdf" quite hilarious. Not even ONE legit source to argument against nuclear power. Just some pointless gibberish and misinformation. For instance this juicy quote that activists must love so much: "Prices for solar generated Kilowatt/Hours (Kw/Hr) are coming down dramatically, (as low as 1 baht per Kw/Hr) as efficiency rates are going up to unprecedented levels (up to 79%)." As of today, the newest technology allows about half of that. I do not care to read all of it.

[henryalleman]

And last but not least where they get the money for a nuclear plant, the investment is sky high.

I realy do think that there are much more urgent needs for this country than a nuclear power plant.

hmm, so you would prefer blackouts due to power shortages?

Thailand needs to act soon before there is a power shortage. These power plants take time to build. If its anything like the Swampy airport, we not even see one built in our generation

You know very well that the black outs are not created by power shortages, but by cables breaking of or spark. Did you ever look how they are fixed.

everytime some heavy rain is falling we have that problem. From the balcony of my condo I can look to an lot where they pick up cables when something go wrong, I can tell you its a very bussy place 24/7.

[fullcave]

Thailand opts to build nuclear power plant

Thailand will proceed with a plan to build a nuclear power plant to serve the increased demand for electricity, according to Thailand’s Energy Minister Piyasvasti Amaranand.

Addressing a speech on "Why should a nuclear power plant be built?", Mr. Piyasvasti said the nuclear facility is needed because of the rising consumption of electrical power.

Electricity use has risen 1.14 per cent in comparison with economic growth of one per cent, he explained.

The nuclear power plant is an alternative to produce electricity with no affect on the global warming, the minister said. The action plan to build the nuclear power plant will be finished at the end of this year and

preparation will take another seven years. Construction will be completed in 2020.

Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) governor Kraisri Karnasuta said that construction of the nuclear plant is necessary, and that EGAT will clearly explain its necessity to the public before construction begins.

The project, however, is under way and EGAT is looking for an 800 acre site to build the 4,000 megawatt power plant.

The budget to build the nuclear power plant is estimated at US$6 billion.

When the construction is finished, the cost of producing electricity at the nuclear power plant will stay at Bt2.01 per unit, lower than the Bt2.05 per unit of the electricity produced by conventional coal-fired power plants.

Source: TNA - 11 June 2007

Anybody know where are they building it???

[321niti123]

This is complete s***. THey cant even build an airport properly and they're thinking of trying to ground thai bones to dust-no global warming-but radiation.

They cant even protect a few diplomats, stop a gas truck from being stolen and used in a hostage situation, or the AIRPORT, how the hel_l are they going to stop anyone from getting into this powerplant?!

[cheshiremusicman]

Thailand will run out of gas in twenty years. After that it's import of gas from Burma or hydropower from Laos. Biomass is not going to be a complete solution, I think that is obvious. Solar power might be promising with cheaper technology but it's not wise to rely on optimistic forecasts.

I also believe that people planning these things and doing cost benefit analysis aren't stupid, and they aren't bought up by nuclear companies yet, now it's the right time to get unbiased opinions.

Just one thing - where do you source the info gas is running out as quickly as 20 years - I have no idea on the timeframe - interesting point.

Sadly for me I have discussed this exact subject with the head of the overall committee leading the research for nuclear, and i can assure you in his mind it is a done deal. This is not a cost benefit exercise - this is a justification project of how to sell it. I don't think his mind is made up on the basis of bribes (although politicians will decide that way), he just wants it. After all he is a nuclear physicist.

And I have no doubt there are nuclear companies standing behind willing to pay the price to get the contract.

Thanks for confirming what I already suspected Steve. It's a done deal, meaning that $33 million (!!!!!!!!) earmarked for studies, can be used for purely PR purposes, greasing palms to buy allegiance and a general honey pot for bureaucrats and politicians to dip into when ever the need arises. Hmmmmm, what a sweet, bequerel tainted prospect for the Thai people to look forward in a few years time. It looks like the Canadian govt's. investment in turning a few bright sparks in Thai universities into nuclear engineer's and energy planners a decade or more ago has now paid off. Thanks Canada!

I wonder how many 'jollies' $33million buys ? Lots of them to Canada eh?

[delmersomsri]

SCARY INDEED. How far away do I have to move and still stay in Thailand. Who needs N. Korea or Iran?

[brahmburgers]

Wind power potential for Thailand? Not sure. Who has data on steady/strong winds blowing for Thailand?

Solar has vast potential. One slight drawback, is many days per year there is haze. Not just over Thailand, but over all of SE Asia. The good news is, haze/cloudiness aren't big hinderances to solar. I have a solar hook-up which works quite well even when thin clouds block the sun.

Even more important than new expensive power generation, is conservation. Thais need to have a better general understanding of the importance of turning off AC electric when not needed. Currently, they keep lights/appliances on irresponsibly. Easily over half of power usage could be saved if there was that sort of awareness.

Back to Solar: Several farang countries, which are one to two decades ahead of Thailand in terms of trends, are building solar power generation facilities. The data (for concentrated solar) is out there, and the technology exists, but EGAT is myopic in its lust for nuclear. Perhaps the folks at EGAT are aware of what's going on at the vanguard of solar (though I doubt it), but they don't give a dam_n, because all their efforts are towards getting nuke plants built. It's a 'face' thing. Vietnam and Indonesia are getting 'em, Burma is talking about it. Thailand wants to be viewed as the kid on the block with bigger shinier nuclear plants.

Will there be cost overuns? Will there be corruption in bidding and building contracts? Will there be maintenance problems? Will there be mishaps (or worse)? Will there be problems with storing and disposing of nuclear waste?

The answer to all those questions in the previous paragraph are a resounding YES.

I don't say that as a cynic - more as pragmatist, and one who hopes for the smartest and healthiest choices for Thailand's next generations.

Plus, what company is going to insure the N. plants? Will it be gov't? The same sort of gov't which reneges on int'l contracts every so often (fire boats for Bkk, etc)?

[brahmburgers]

I also found the "nuke1.pdf" quite hilarious. Not even ONE legit source to argument against nuclear power. Just some pointless gibberish and misinformation. For instance this juicy quote that activists must love so much: "Prices for solar generated Kilowatt/Hours (Kw/Hr) are coming down dramatically, (as low as 1 baht per Kw/Hr) as efficiency rates are going up to unprecedented levels (up to 79%)." As of today, the newest technology allows about half of that. I do not care to read all of it.

Unless the people at the vanguard of concentrated solar technology are skewing the numbers, price per Kw/Hr are going down dramatically for a large scale concentrated solar array. Did you know there's working technology that can place solar panels on water? The panels automatically submerge when strong winds/waves are detected. check out sunengy.com for more on that. There are others.

Farang scientists are working fervently to develop ever more efficient and lower cost solutions. What are Thai scientists doing? At best, Thai experts will be several years behind, and possibly do a decent job of copying what farang scientists develop. Indeed, that's a key component of the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks. Emerging and developing countries want access to all the latest alt.power equipment without paying any royalties. I can see the sense of (the inventing/innovative countries) assisting developing countries on a case by case basis, but why should it all the tech innovations be given away for free?

Thais could be a part of developing alt.tech. What's EGAT doing to further that? My guess: nothing - just sitting back and waiting to clandestinely start building nuclear plants in other peoples' back yards.

Someone asked 'where does EGAT plan to build?

Answer: they have proposed sites, but arent' divulging that info publicly for obvious reasons. They don't want public uprising. So, the more EGAT delays in divulging such info, the less time citizens have to organize. Incidentally, the report (nuke1.pdf) includes a hand-drawn map of possible nuclear sites for Thailand's coasts.

[rakman]

Producing energy with nuclear power is relatively environmental friendly way when compared to coal, oil or wind (for wind - huge space needed, ineffective, low-quality), but we have to ask is it really sustainable and how the price rises will affect in the future.

Modern nuclear plants are incredibly safe, and with proper care (yea yea Thai care isn't gonna blow it up) the risks can be minimized to a level where this is no longer a factor.

However, solar energy will soon enough be a cheaper and there's a clear trend suggesting the technology will improve to a point where it will be the best option (assuming they cannot commercialize fusion energy production in the next 10-20 years).

We are now about to finish the construction work of the latest reactor (yes, 5 million people but there are 5 reactors) in Finland and I do not think everyone are satisfied with the said 50 % increase in the construction costs.

I hope all options are carefully considered before making any hasty decisions and I do really hope no politics (or corruption) are involved with this. Has anyone seen any estimates and calculations about the alternative options?

The Sun provides ~1kW/sqm on the earth's surface The usual photovoltaic panels are ~11% efficient, giving about 100W/sqm. Unless the collectors track the sun, their most efficient collection time is about 4 hours, with reduced output for another 4 - 6 hours. Then, if no means of storing excess power (assuming there is) the lights go out at night. PV panels have a payback of about 20 years, they might last 30 years if nothing (bad weather) destroys them. Plus, they need to be cleaned periodically to keep them at max efficiency. Do the math to figure out how much land would be needed to generate a decent amount of power. What happens to the land under the collectors?

Solar is an expensive novelty when and where standard power isn't available.

Wind is not as viable as advertised:

From http://www.aweo.org/windEon2004.html

For technical reasons, the intensive use of wind power in Germany [one of the largest, most advanced users of wind power; my comment] is associated with significant operational challenges:

• 
  
• Only limited wind power is available. In order to cover electricity demands, traditional power station capacities must be maintained as so-called "shadow power stations" at a total level of more than 80% of the installed wind energy capacity, so that the electricity consumption is also covered during economically difficult periods.
  

Unless one enjoys brownouts and outages, good luck on wind or solar power.

These technologies are not mature enough to be practical, except as an expensive government supported boondoggle.

[brahmburgers]

Modern nuclear plants are incredibly safe, and with proper care (yea yea Thai care isn't gonna blow it up) the risks can be minimized to a level where this is no longer a factor.

Even a tech-superior country like Japan had radioactive emissions from its largest and most modern reactor not long ago. How safe would security be for a Thai plant? How safe are would its decommissioned nuke site be for 60,000 years? How safe is the spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive components? How safe for are the copious amounts of warm water which have to be pumped back to sea? Most of the proposed Thai sites are right along the Burmese border AND right near the southern insurgents.

The Sun provides ~1kW/sqm on the earth's surface The usual photovoltaic panels are ~11% efficient, giving about 100W/sqm. Unless the collectors track the sun, their most efficient collection time is about 4 hours, with reduced output for another 4 - 6 hours.

You're not up to snuff of the latest developments with concentrated solar. The info is out there, find it and learn.

Then, if no means of storing excess power (assuming there is) the lights go out at night. There are several viable ways of storing DC power. Again, learn what's going on.

PV panels have a payback of about 20 years, they might last 30 years if nothing (bad weather) destroys them.

Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant in Sacramento California was decommissioned after only about a dozen years.

Plus, they need to be cleaned periodically to keep them at max efficiency. Do the math to figure out how much land would be needed to generate a decent amount of power.

Thais are adept at cleaning windows. How different than clean solar panels?

What happens to the land under the collectors?

It could be used for animal grazing, a park with picnic tables, shade loving plant nursery, the possibilities are vast.

Solar is an expensive novelty when and where standard power isn't available.

Unless one enjoys brownouts and outages, good luck on wind or solar power.

The most important thing Thais need to learn, in order to avoid energy shortages is HOW TO CONSERVE ELECTRICITY! I was out this morning, street lamps were on at 8 am. 7-11 stores use immense arrays of lamps. Unnecessary air-con usage in Thailand is world renown. Two lanes of Loy Kratong car traffic was at a standstill for 2 Km leading up to a bridge near my village. Not one car driver had the sense to turn his/her car off, even though they knew the traffic wouldn't move for a half hour or more. There are myriad easy ways Thais could conserve energy. If I were PM, that would be top priority.

These technologies are not mature enough to be practical, except as an expensive government supported boondoggle.

[brahmburgers]

ok, we're not supposed to quote from the Bkk Post (which I won't), but they had an article in yesterday which described a meeting near Surathani province. If memory serves me well, the meeting was EGAT authorities reporting on some surveying type prelim work they were doing to check out sites for a nuclear power plant. The common people were massed outside the meeting hall, annoyed that they had had no prior notice (from the pu yai ban) about EGAT being in their neighborhood, doing such work, and also pissed that they were not invited in to the meeting hall. A sympathetic person on stage grabbed a microphone and spoke for the people outside. The outsiders stormed in to the building and shouted down the EGAT representative, and forced the EGAT reps to leave, and the meeting dissolved.

It's not the first time residents have shown their outrage at having a nuclear power plant in their vicinity, and it won't be the last. Let's hope they get hold of a Thai version of the book 'EGAT's THAITANIC' (if there is a Thai version), and keep up the pressure on EGAT to come clean on what nuclear really entails for Thailand - rather than the squeaky clean version EGAT is trying to peddle on the masses.

Better yet, would be Thai people becoming more aware of the awesome possibilities that are happening at the vanguard of 'concentrated solar' technology. Wouldn't hurt for T.Visa members to learn about concentrated solar also. All of us know Thais, and opening up the debate to viable alternatives would be like a breath of fresh air in the EGAT cigarette smokers lounge.

[caf]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state. And Thailand has debates among Thai people?. Sorry, no - this is not the West.

No checks balances or controls here! TIT

Money and paybacks will decide.

Neither health and safety or listening to foreign advice are Thai traits.

[caf]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Your blimp example is amusing but that is all it is.

There will be no debate among the Thai people. There will be talks about commissions though.

Are the Thais safety conscious ? I think not and that would make me restless for sure.

possibly not debate, but a rabble once they find out where the nuke plant is located

and where will that get the country? the rabble may make noises but nothing will happen.

[Yoshitaka]

Just build the dam plant on the disputed land with the Khmers.

[brahmburgers]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Your blimp example is amusing but that is all it is.

There will be no debate among the Thai people. There will be talks about commissions though.

Are the Thais safety conscious ? I think not and that would make me restless for sure.

possibly not debate, but a rabble once they find out where the nuke plant is located

and where will that get the country? the rabble may make noises but nothing will happen.

If nothing happens in regard to building nuclear plants, that will be a good thing for those of us who oppose Thailand going nuclear.

If you're implying that 'nothing will happen' as regards Thailand's future electricity needs, then you've got a point. It is a serious issue, and serious conservation awareness by all Thais should be a factor in any discussion in that regard.

[ding]

This will end very badly. I'm 100% certain.

Solar is the obvious choice. They could spend the same baht on research and development, then sell to the rest of the world. This is the worst choice I've seen Thailand make in in 16 years of admiring Thailand. Even my country is not so foolish, and we've proven VERY foolish.

[caf]

I have as many doubts about Nuclear power and Nuclear powe reactors as anyone on this forum.

But it strikes me that much of the opposition expressed here are from those who simply feel that :

1. Thais are inferior...in judgement and intellect.

2. Farangs (westerners, especially British) are inherently superior to Thais.

3. For that reason a nuclear reactor might be appropriate in "dear old Albion", but not Thailand.

Reminds me of the old New Yorker magazine cartoon with two Colonel Blimp types....Gin and Tonic in hand...hearing the sound of drums....and saying, "The natives are restless tonight, Fawnsworth, aren't they?".

I would certainly hope that the training of Thai personel who operate any nuclear reactor would be full and verified before they were allowed to operate the reactor. And I expect that this would require international certification of their training.

But I would expect the same thing of a reactor in England, France, or the United States.

Thailand has a lot of energy alternatives...Solar energy and Natural Gas reserves are two.

Never the less, I can understand the lure of a Nulear reactor, that produces a lot of electricity at one concentrated site for a city like Bangkok.

I do hope that there will be a debate among the Thai people about the matter before a decision will be made.

We shall see if there is.

Your blimp example is amusing but that is all it is.

There will be no debate among the Thai people. There will be talks about commissions though.

Are the Thais safety conscious ? I think not and that would make me restless for sure.

possibly not debate, but a rabble once they find out where the nuke plant is located

and where will that get the country? the rabble may make noises but nothing will happen.

If nothing happens in regard to building nuclear plants, that will be a good thing for those of us who oppose Thailand going nuclear.

If you're implying that 'nothing will happen' as regards Thailand's future electricity needs, then you've got a point. It is a serious issue, and serious conservation awareness by all Thais should be a factor in any discussion in that regard.

i do not think there will be any discussion; and any protest will be like pissing in the wind.

[Soutpeel]

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state.

To operate a Nuclear commercial nuclear power station, yes it does....if it does not, it will not get the fuel rods for the reactor (s),

[caf]

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state.

To operate a Nuclear commercial nuclear power station, yes it does....if it does not, it will not get the fuel rods for the reactor (s),

Really?

So how did Iran get nuclear?

[thaihome]

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state.

To operate a Nuclear commercial nuclear power station, yes it does....if it does not, it will not get the fuel rods for the reactor (s),

Really?

So how did Iran get nuclear?

Don't keep up much do you?

The issue with Iran is about their uranium enrichment program, that is making the fuel themselves, so they do not have to buy fuel on the regulated world market. Iran claims this is for use in power generation, but most of the rest of the world is convinced it for production of a nuclear device.

The also mine the uranium themselves as well.

TH

[Soutpeel]

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state.

To operate a Nuclear commercial nuclear power station, yes it does....if it does not, it will not get the fuel rods for the reactor (s),

Really?

So how did Iran get nuclear?

Don't keep up much do you?

The issue with Iran is about their uranium enrichment program, that is making the fuel themselves, so they do not have to buy fuel on the regulated world market. Iran claims this is for use in power generation, but most of the rest of the world is convinced it for production of a nuclear device.

The also mine the uranium themselves as well.

TH

TH..

Very nicely explained...

[lifeincnx]

The idea that nuclear power is cheap is an oxymoron. I hail from the states and we've been going back and forth for years trying to figure out what part of the country will be the lucky recipient of spent fuel rods with a radioactive half life of 20,000 years. Current winner is Iron Mountain near Las Vegas where we will bury tons and tons of this stuff. That should add an even greater 'glow' to the Las Vegas strip (during the day no less). There is nothing cheap about it. But the two real money makers here will be the Thai cement compnaies that have to house all this nonsense and the clean crws that have to maintain it for hundreds of years. Buy Siam Cement as a hedge.

[Tonto21]

If you don’t think nuclear power in Thailand is a good idea, just start spreading the rumour that the west thinks it’s a great idea, just what Thailand needs.......The Thai government will u-turn on the idea so fast, you’ll hear their eye balls snap back into place

[caf]

Thailand does not require international certification. It is a sovereign state.

To operate a Nuclear commercial nuclear power station, yes it does....if it does not, it will not get the fuel rods for the reactor (s),

Really?

So how did Iran get nuclear?

Don't keep up much do you?

The issue with Iran is about their uranium enrichment program, that is making the fuel themselves, so they do not have to buy fuel on the regulated world market. Iran claims this is for use in power generation, but most of the rest of the world is convinced it for production of a nuclear device.

The also mine the uranium themselves as well.

TH

So which countries gave it international certification ? which was your original point, though you seem to have forgotten you said that.

[brahmburgers]

Anybody know where are they building it???

Bkk Post had a small map, a few days ago, which indicated about 20 potential sites. All but two of the sites were along the coast. Two were in the middle of Thailand, probably near sizable lakes, as all nuke plants need a large water source. The map was essentially the same as the map drawn months earlier, in the anti-nuclear E-booklet 'EGAT's Thaitanic'

i do not think there will be any discussion; and any protest will be like pissing in the wind.

Protests can be effective, particularly non-violent ones. If you need a refresher on that, go back and check out the biographies of Ghandi and M.L.King.

If you don't think nuclear power in Thailand is a good idea, just start spreading the rumour that the west thinks it's a great idea, just what Thailand needs.......The Thai government will u-turn on the idea so fast, you'll hear their eye balls snap back into place

Thais, like Asians in general, have a love hate relationship with 'the west'. On the one hand, there are those, like Malaysia's former PM Mahathir, who would poke holes at western ways every chance he got, but then he privately sent his kids to western universities. It's fashionable for Thais to find fault with western ways, yet look around and see them all, particularly college aged youngsters, copying western ways in more ways than you can count.

One of the main reasons Thailand's EGAT wants nuclear power, is it sees Vietnam going nuclear, and hears about Indonesia and Burma have plans to do the same. Thailand, which fancies itself as the most modern of SE Asian countries, doesn't want to be left out of the nuclear club. It feels it will lose face. If EGAT's heads weren't stuck in the sand, they'd see they would 'gain face/prestige' by taking a bold look at viable alternative power sources that are cheaper, both in the near and the far term, are cleaner, and safer.

Concentrated solar is not some pie-in-the-sky concept that may be viable sometime in the future. It's proven technology. The proof can be seen in operating sites in Spain, western Europe, the US, Canada, in Australia and other places where innovative thinking is encouraged rather than stifled.

[Deke]

Concentrated solar is not some pie-in-the-sky concept that may be viable sometime in the future. It's proven technology. The proof can be seen in operating sites in Spain, western Europe, the US, Canada, in Australia and other places where innovative thinking is encouraged rather than stifled.

Just because something is technically possible doesn't mean that it is the best solution.

Do you want to be the first person to give up your air conditioner and refrigerator or would you prefer to pay four times the rate for electricity that you do now? That is what you are implying if you want to rely on solar energy.

If not, look at what makes practical economic sense within realistic environmental guidelines.

Nuclear power has an obvious place within a mix of diversified generation options.

[Soutpeel]

The idea that nuclear power is cheap is an oxymoron. I hail from the states and we've been going back and forth for years trying to figure out what part of the country will be the lucky recipient of spent fuel rods with a radioactive half life of 20,000 years. Current winner is Iron Mountain near Las Vegas where we will bury tons and tons of this stuff. That should add an even greater 'glow' to the Las Vegas strip (during the day no less). There is nothing cheap about it. But the two real money makers here will be the Thai cement compnaies that have to house all this nonsense and the clean crws that have to maintain it for hundreds of years. Buy Siam Cement as a hedge.

Fuel rods will not be stored near Las Vegas.....fuel rods are reprocessed, "the tons and tons of this stuff" you refer to is in fact what is called low level waste. You are correct however in saying they are stored in concrete drums.