Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Tim Sheens]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

 

[Abraham]

So you're voting for the Australian Conservative Party :stuck_out_tongue:

There's hope for you yet.

Ahhhh no. Lib Dems support nuclear energy as well Abe.

That's okay, i like them too.

The LD's is about as close to right wing as I'll go. And that's largely because they are socially progressive. Their taxation policy appears a bit light to me but everyone would have far more money in their pockets (not sure where funding for public assets and institutions comes from though, I am a proponent of public roads, health and education.) I don't agree with their stance on firearms but at the very least they still support licensing and regulation to a fair degree.

Its a slow creep … on day your voting for the Liberal Democrats, and before you know it you will be handing out how to vote cards for the Christian Democrats.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Ahhhh no. Lib Dems support nuclear energy as well Abe.

That's okay, i like them too.

The LD's is about as close to right wing as I'll go. And that's largely because they are socially progressive. Their taxation policy appears a bit light to me but everyone would have far more money in their pockets (not sure where funding for public assets and institutions comes from though, I am a proponent of public roads, health and education.) I don't agree with their stance on firearms but at the very least they still support licensing and regulation to a fair degree.

Its a slow creep … on day your voting for the Liberal Democrats, and before you know it you will be handing out how to vote cards for the Christian Democrats.

Haha… A relative of mine is a CDP pollie, there's no and bugger all chance you'd ever see me turn up for them.

 

[Abraham]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

 

[magpiecol]

Australia's chief scientist said the other day that even if we closed down all of Australia ie mothball all vehicles, use zero coal, plug up all cows etc, this would have zero effect in regard to cc.

The seasons will continue as usual and the world will be fine.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Australia's chief scientist said the other day that even if we closed down all of Australia ie mothball all vehicles, use zero coal, plug up all cows etc, this would have zero effect in regard to cc.

The seasons will continue as usual and the world will be fine.

Link?

 

[Tim Sheens]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

Walking occasionally as you suggested would be a good start, as Joe and his average family here are producing about three times that of their counterparts on this planet. We would also be well short of where we are if we relied on private industry as so much more technological development comes from useless government programs.

 

[Abraham]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

Walking occasionally as you suggested would be a good start, as Joe and his average family here are producing about three times that of their counterparts on this planet. We would also be well short of where we are if we relied on private industry as so much more technological development comes from useless government programs.

Well then we disagree. It will take Joe and his family 50 lifetimes to produce the amount of emissions that one of those Chinese Factories produces in an hour. By all means look after the environment in your day to day life, that's fantastic, but don't pretend you're lowering global temperatures in the process.

 

[Snake]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

The standard of living will be destroyed in this country by the insane political agenda that is emerging… if you have younger children they will have no jobs and as parents you will be lucky to have one ...
I need someone to explain to me why our country has to commit economic suicide when in China have 1000 coal powered power stations and building 50 more each year and this does not take into account what India has !
If Australians are that stupid to follow this political agenda they deserve everything thing that this will bring ... the French have realised what this is going to do to there way of life and we have seen over the last couple of weeks how that is turning out .

 

[Tim Sheens]

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

Walking occasionally as you suggested would be a good start, as Joe and his average family here are producing about three times that of their counterparts on this planet. We would also be well short of where we are if we relied on private industry as so much more technological development comes from useless government programs.

Well then we disagree. It will take Joe and his family 50 lifetimes to produce the amount of emissions that one of those Chinese Factories produces in an hour. By all means look after the environment in your day to day life, that's fantastic, but don't pretend you're lowering global temperatures in the process.

Certainly would as the emissions from many such a Chinese factory is from producing the excessive amount of goods consumed by 50 average Joe type families in their lifetime. Obviously, this makes our global footprint considerably worse than the already three times per capita average produced on our shores, but unlike the ignorant, you already know that, so I was somewhat surprised to read that.

 

[Abraham]

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

Walking occasionally as you suggested would be a good start, as Joe and his average family here are producing about three times that of their counterparts on this planet. We would also be well short of where we are if we relied on private industry as so much more technological development comes from useless government programs.

Well then we disagree. It will take Joe and his family 50 lifetimes to produce the amount of emissions that one of those Chinese Factories produces in an hour. By all means look after the environment in your day to day life, that's fantastic, but don't pretend you're lowering global temperatures in the process.

Certainly would as the emissions from many such a Chinese factory is from producing the excessive amount of goods consumed by 50 average Joe type families in their lifetime. Obviously, this makes our footprint considerably worse than the already three times per capita average produced on our shores, but unlike the ignorant, you already know that, so I was somewhat surprised to read that.

Not sure where your getting this from. On average a Chinese person now has the same carbon footprint as a European citizen. So no, our footprint is not worse, unless you are comparing us to African tribesman who spear their dinner and wash their clothes by smacking it on rocks down at the river. Is living a third world existence appealling to you?

We aren't going to agree on this, as you have your ideology firmly in place. Just don't expect it to lower the sea levels anytime soon.

 

[Abraham]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

Thought that you were going okay until the ultimate paragraph. Upon reflection, as individuals, do you really think so?

Absolutely. What is Joe Average living in Liverpool with his wife and 2 kids going to do to stop man-made climate change in any meaningful way (assuming that human's have anything to do with it in the first place)?

Stop using the heater in winter? Walk to the shops instead of drive? I'm sure that will make the global climate plummet in no time.

Private Industry will lead the way to develop the necessary technology. I guarantee it wont be on the back of signing a meaningless "Paris Agreement" or slugging taxpayers a Carbon Tax which will end up hurting the poorest of society, and ultimately funding some other useless government program.

I'd be interested in hearing how you think individuals will slash emissions rates?

The standard of living will be destroyed in this country by the insane political agenda that is emerging… if you have younger children they will have no jobs and as parents you will be lucky to have one ...
I need someone to explain to me why our country has to commit economic suicide when in China have 1000 coal powered power stations and building 50 more each year and this does not take into account what India has !
If Australians are that stupid to follow this political agenda they deserve everything thing that this will bring ... the French have realised what this is going to do to there way of life and we have seen over the last couple of weeks how that is turning out .

A sub-set of the population is that stupid. And to say this is concerning, is a major understatement.

 

[happy_tiger]

Unless you are an atmospheric scientist or climatology expert, you are deferring everything you think to be true on this topic to those experts. So the question becomes, how reliable are the experts?

Personally i am agnostic on the question. I don't know, and i don't pretend to. I know the climate is changing, but it always has. And i know man made pollution is not a good thing. That's all i know for sure and certain.

There have been enough scandals and foul ups to reasonably question the ethics and models of the people we all trust to provide us with this information. It doesn't automatically mean they are wrong, it just means i don't trust them blindly like alot of people seem to. There are legitimate conflicts of interest, and their models are never correct. But I am naturally skeptical when in comes to many things, so maybe that's just me.

Whether made made climate change is real or not, one thing absolutely certain is that getting taxpayers to pay higher taxes is not going to reduce global temperatures. Over time the technology will become available to store energy in such a manner that we don't need to rely on fossil fuels (which will eventually deplete anyway), or to store nuclear waste in such a manner that makes it a less controversial alternative, or to develop renewable energy sources that actually work. And the people who achieve this will become squillionaires, so the incentive is definitely there.

So while man made climate change may or may not be real, there is basically nothing the ordinary person can do to change it. But that won't stop governments telling us otherwise.

There's plenty the average person can do. For a start we could vote in a party that would advocate nuclear energy.

Excellent comments from you both.

Abraham another thoughtful intelligent posting.

CB, an honest debate in this country over the use of nuclear power has been stifled for far too long.

Nuclear sounds wonderful until you find out it will be in your backyard :laughing:

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I would live next door to one happy. Not that it would happen as there would be an exclusion zone anyway.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Walking occasionally as you suggested would be a good start, as Joe and his average family here are producing about three times that of their counterparts on this planet. We would also be well short of where we are if we relied on private industry as so much more technological development comes from useless government programs.

Well then we disagree. It will take Joe and his family 50 lifetimes to produce the amount of emissions that one of those Chinese Factories produces in an hour. By all means look after the environment in your day to day life, that's fantastic, but don't pretend you're lowering global temperatures in the process.

Certainly would as the emissions from many such a Chinese factory is from producing the excessive amount of goods consumed by 50 average Joe type families in their lifetime. Obviously, this makes our footprint considerably worse than the already three times per capita average produced on our shores, but unlike the ignorant, you already know that, so I was somewhat surprised to read that.

Not sure where your getting this from. On average a Chinese person now has the same carbon footprint as a European citizen. So no, our footprint is not worse, unless you are comparing us to African tribesman who spear their dinner and wash their clothes by smacking it on rocks down at the river. Is living a third world existence appealling to you?

We aren't going to agree on this, as you have your ideology firmly in place. Just don't expect it to lower the sea levels anytime soon.

Not ideology, an opinion based on facts, some of which you ignored when replying above, as per capita emissions are totally different to a carbon footprint. I have spent a short time amongst those living a third world existence and thoroughly enjoyed my time there, as I always do when visiting villages in developing countries, so I suggest you trek to a remote village to sample for yourself.

 

[magpiecol]

Well then we disagree. It will take Joe and his family 50 lifetimes to produce the amount of emissions that one of those Chinese Factories produces in an hour. By all means look after the environment in your day to day life, that's fantastic, but don't pretend you're lowering global temperatures in the process.

Certainly would as the emissions from many such a Chinese factory is from producing the excessive amount of goods consumed by 50 average Joe type families in their lifetime. Obviously, this makes our footprint considerably worse than the already three times per capita average produced on our shores, but unlike the ignorant, you already know that, so I was somewhat surprised to read that.

Not sure where your getting this from. On average a Chinese person now has the same carbon footprint as a European citizen. So no, our footprint is not worse, unless you are comparing us to African tribesman who spear their dinner and wash their clothes by smacking it on rocks down at the river. Is living a third world existence appealling to you?

We aren't going to agree on this, as you have your ideology firmly in place. Just don't expect it to lower the sea levels anytime soon.

Not ideology, an opinion based on facts, some of which you ignored when replying above, as per capita emissions are totally different to a carbon footprint. I have spent a short time amongst those living a third world existence and thoroughly enjoyed my time there, as I always do when visiting villages in developing countries, so I suggest you trek to a remote village to sample for yourself.

How was the plumbing?

:brick:

 

[colmcd]

She was there, unsure if you were even alive then(I wasn't). I can be certain that you were not hanging around Feminist circles listening to what they were talking about. So why are you talking like an expert when you really know Zero about this… Guessing you heard this off an "expert" like alan jones or tim blair, etc... They have Zero knowledge about most things they talk about and jones lead a premiere Balmain Tigers team to second last! They are lost, don't talk about stuff you really don't know.
\
\
I really wonder if you are a Tigers fan at all? Honestly you post more about politics then the Tigers. Most people here won't care that you mix up Nazis and Soviets borrowing ideas off each other at a time arguably 30ish years before we see the term even mentioned! Saying stuff like that is more ambitious then Warwick Kappa wanting to box Wendell Sailor. As we see the scomo government rush encryption laws to silence us and our right to a private conversation, you say the sillyness above?

Where were you when Wests Tigers fans were booing little johnny howard at the 2005 NRL grand final?

Attacking the man instead of the ball.

Sad little man.

I'm playing both.
You are saying Nazi's invented a modern phenomenon and shared it with the Soviet Comrades a mere 30 years before it was invented? As above^ it's sillyness, Hitler did not dance with Stalin and George Soros, to create this great term. This is fantasy.

So why would you say such fiction on a football forum? You post in the politics area a lot but arn't mentioning much about Brooks, Lawrence or the Tigers?

And you're failing at both. Badly.

People with IQs in double digits can read for themselves what i wrote. I didn't say the Nazis invented PC, I didn't say that the Nazis and Soviets communicated, and it is a historical fact that "political correctness" was not invented in the 1970's.

So the obvious question that has to be asked is, why are you arguing about something which you evidently know Zero about? That's not an insult, you actually know Zero about this topic.

It took you two days to come up with a reply in which you literally struck out on every point you made. There should be some kind of award for that … maybe the Ahmed Bajouri Trophy For Excellence.

I am failing at Nothing here.
So while you accuse me of "playing the man and not the ball" your first statement is "People with IQs in double digits can read for themselves ". You're not watching the ball that much.

What you are asserting above is an insane rewrite of history.. Nazi's and Commies did not get together on Propaganda.
They just did not. END.
They did not collude on this. It's utterly ridiculous to assert Nazi's and Communists to have invented 'political correctness' together. That's on the "Martians have invaded earth" spectrum of wacky.

I am happy to hear people's views out, if they are reasonable. What you (or some crazy blogger) have done is co-opted two things you don't like (Nazi's and Commie's) to have invented something you don't like 'political Correctness'.
There is no Fact there. No reason, nothing.

What you are saying above is Pure Propaganda. The kind that leads to Orwellian states like the Nazi's and the Soviets.
I like my freedom, stop hurting it.

 

[happy_tiger]

I would live next door to one happy. Not that it would happen as there would be an exclusion zone anyway.

And watching your property value fall by half overnight wouldn't be an issue CB ??

 

[colmcd]

I would live next door to one happy. Not that it would happen as there would be an exclusion zone anyway.

And watching your property value fall by half overnight wouldn't be an issue CB ??

Missed the thread, but are you talking Wind Farms?

I know the South Australian plan to have free solar panels installed on houses. These are paid for by the excess electricity not used by the house going into the grid.
Likewise I have heard of some wind farms offering free power to those that have them on their farm, along with the rent and whatever contract signed.

 

[jadtiger]

I would live next door to one happy. Not that it would happen as there would be an exclusion zone anyway.

And watching your property value fall by half overnight wouldn't be an issue CB ??

Missed the thread, but are you talking Wind Farms?

I know the South Australian plan to have free solar panels installed on houses. These are paid for by the excess electricity not used by the house going into the grid.
Likewise I have heard of some wind farms offering free power to those that have them on their farm, along with the rent and whatever contract signed.

They are talking nuclear power stations(reactors).