EU Referendum - How will you vote?

Why is what is being proposed better? Have you got any evidence?

Oh dear.

Whilst most of the developed world is pursuing the goal of reducing CO2 output, the EU has specifically mandated renewable energy.

The other obvious option would be nuclear.

Previous UK governments have favoured renewables over nuclear too, but right now there's no point in a party putting forward a policy of nuclear rather than renewables as it would be illegal.

Let me assure you, as someone who has worked on an EU funded project and on several UK Research Council funded projects that this is a load of nonsense.

You saying something doesn't assure me of anything.

Let me assure you, as someone who has worked on an EU funded project and on several UK Research Council funded projects that this is a load of nonsense.

Is it hell!

Improvements to traditional nuclear.

Thorium cycle.

Fusion.

All these have the potential to resolve the CO2 issue without all the impracticalities of EU mandated renewables.

Is it hell!

 

Improvements to traditional nuclear.

Thorium cycle.

Fusion.

 

All these have the potential to resolve the CO2 issue without all the impracticalities of EU mandated renewables.

ITER is partly funded by EU money...

Why is what is being proposed better? Have you got any evidence?

I didn't say it would be better, the quote from your link said it would be better.

---------- Post added 30-05-2016 at 22:20 ----------

ITER is partly funded by EU money...

Which we gave them, so it's our money given back to us.

I didn't say it would be better, the quote from your link said it would be better..

That quote wasn't evidence. It was somebody who wants to exit the EU and will say anything to support his view.

Clearly it isn't evidence but.....based on what he said what do you think is better about it?

I didn't say it would be better, the quote from your link said it would be better.

 

---------- Post added 30-05-2016 at 22:20 ----------

 

 

Which we gave them, so it's our money given back to us.

....ok?

Was just providing an example of how the EU and other nations' money is being used to fund nuclear fusion research. It was a response to what unbeliever was saying. Don't worry sutty27 I didn't drop it in as a zinger to kill all further discussion!

That quote wasn't evidence. It was somebody who wants to exit the EU and will say anything to support his view.

 

Clearly it isn't evidence but.....based on what he said what do you think is better about it?

But will he be in charge, is he a loan voice or is he speaking for parliament, my guess is that he is just throwing some ideas around, the ultimate decisions will rest with parliament, that's that bunch of people we elect to make decisions on out behalf.

But will he be in charge, is he a loan voice or is he speaking for parliament, my guess is that he is just throwing some ideas around, the ultimate decisions will rest with parliament, that's that bunch of people we elect to make decisions on out behalf.

That's the Brexiters' way it seems. Just throwing ideas around...

What a joke. Big opportunity missed IMO. That opportunity was to lift the camapign above the similar ridiculous nonsense being spouted by the remain campaign.

There's still a chance, a few weeks to outline some solid plans.

I didn't say it would be better, the quote from your link said it would be better.

 

---------- Post added 30-05-2016 at 22:20 ----------

 

 

Which we gave them, so it's our money given back to us.

What are you on about? Have you any idea the size of the EU contribution towards the ITER project. The U.K. couldn't afford that on its own. This is actually an example of why being in a collective is to the benefit to all as you all contribute a smaller amount but receive the full benefit.

What are you on about? Have you any idea the size of the EU contribution towards the ITER project. The U.K. couldn't afford that on its own. This is actually an example of why being in a collective is to the benefit to all as you all contribute a smaller amount but receive the full benefit.

It's an international project which could be funded, the EU puts in about $6 billion with other money coming from China, Japan, India, USA, South Korea, and Russian. If we hadn't been part of the EU I feel sure we would have been one of the partners and we would have been able to afford our share.

What are you on about? Have you any idea the size of the EU contribution towards the ITER project. The U.K. couldn't afford that on its own. This is actually an example of why being in a collective is to the benefit to all as you all contribute a smaller amount but receive the full benefit.

It's cheaper than CERN and the many countries involved in that managed to organise themselves to fund it collectively when the EU was just some technocrat's wet dream.