Author: Martyn

Ely Cathedral

I recently paid a visit to Ely.

In the 22 years since I last paid a visit to the city it was
changed a lot for the better.

A major restoration of the cathedral has left it looking like
the magnificent building it is,
rather that the rather neglected place which I remember it as
being.

There is also a stained glass museum within the cathedral
which I would highly recommend anyone to visit.

What I found of particular interest is to be found within the
Lady Chapel,
which is a very fine example of Gothic architecture.

At one stage the windows of this chapel was servery damaged
and there are now just plain glass windows where formally
there would of been magnificent stained glass windows.

Should you visit the Lady Chapel then you might notice
something else which is not ‘bog standard’ in most cathedral
buildings,
for etched in to the bottom of each window is listed one of the
bodies which has help to restore the cathedral,
with with the organisonal symbol or crest placed next to
their name.

The first one of these I noted was that of
Tescos PLC.

I jest not.

The other names include:

– The Marshall of Cambridge.

– The Mercers Company.

– The Kings School.

– British Railway Board.

plus

Barclays, Midland, Lloyds, and Trustee savings banks.

Just how one can justify the inclusion of any references to these corporate bodies as a
part of such an important historical building still needs to be seen.

Cambridge Electronic Instutries also have their own window
within the lady Chapel.

Cambridge Electronic Industries
manufactures electronic interconnection items.

It is owned by Wilson-Mottaz Ltd.

I’d be interested to learn just which companies their products are sold to?

Percentage Figures and Gross Effects.

Last week I saw an advertisement which claims that one in
eight of the people who use the tube are victims of identity
theft.

I just sat there and thought that equates to12.5% of the
population,
which must also mean that 87.5% of the population do not
suffer from any form of identify theft.

The interesting difference between saying 1 in 8
and 87.5%
is that one of them sounds alarmingly high number,
while the other sounds like  a reasonably low percentage.

Perhaps that’s why I always like to see the raw statistics,
rather than any one else’s interpretation of just what they
might mean.

When it comes to any fiscal or population figures then it
makes a lot of sense to do so.

For even 1% of a population can equate to many thousands of
people, which in turn will equate to many thousands of
individual tragedies.

When it comes to percentage cuts in public finances it is not a
question of looking at the figures,
but just what this means to individuals,
and the social impact it will have upon the population as a
whole.

There is a very good argument that all social services should
be protected.

On the other hand there is a conservative argument that
people should not be encouraged to stay within a benefits
reliant culture,
but do something in order to help themselves.

The problem with this comes with a belief that this can be
solved with a totally unrealistic and totally unatonable
‘enterprise culture’.

There is an old socialist saying:
‘ From each according to his abilities
From each according to his means.’

I would agree with the conservatives that we do need to get
away from a benefit reliant culture,
but that must mean setting up more self help projects,
while also establishing more workers & consumer
co-operatives.

Perhaps it is time to look at the figures again,
and see just what will work of the benefit of all.

Talk of cutting public expenditure by 25% may sound very
draconian,
but cutting military expenditure be 100% would be most
welcome indeed.

It might also be worth while if we could all start to think of
public expenditure in terms of encouraging social cooperatives.

If cuts are on the way, then we are going to really need to
money in to those  projects which would benefits us all,
rather than just keep paying out money to the individual.

Failure to do so will mean a lot more poverty stricken
individuals that will need some sort of fiscal help.

It’s not the percentage figures which matter,
but just what those figures mean within the real world.

Cuts In Cumbria – A Chemical Story

I’ve been hearing of late about the whole process of just what
goes on when nukiller waste is put in to storage.

Now we all know that the nukiller industry produces a lot of
very radioactive waste,
but it should also be remembered that what is left behind is a
very toxic chemical mixture which could become very volatile
if it is handled in the wrong way.

Many of these chemicals are also very corrosive,
which makes for some very difficult storage problems,
particularly given that this material is going to present a
radioactive danger for many centuries in to the future.

Thus Windscale,
which was rebranded as Sellefield,
should be regarded as being:-

– a Nukiller Reactor plant,

– a storage facility for highly radioactive waste,

– a facility in which Plutonium is extracted from Highly
Radioactive waste,

&

– Very large chemical conversion factory.

All of which means that what goes on in the plant presents
some very challenging safety problems for us all.

Even if all of the nukiller plants throughout the globe were
to close down right now,
and no more plutonium were to be extracted from the
resulting waste,
then there will still be an ongoing problem which we will have
to be faced up to.

It is not just a problem of safeguarding the waste,
as there will also be a financial burden which will last for
centuries to come.

Meanwhile back at Windscale: –
there have been so many reports of chemical & radioactive
leaks over the years,
that it all makes for such a very very very long list.

That’s why I’m not even going try to mention just 0.1% of what
has gone on within or around the plant over the years.

Never mind the growing list of criticisms about just how the
plant operates,
which might be best summed up as a chemical incompetence.

For while there has been a lot of effort put in to reducing the
quantity of waste,
very little thought about just how to deal with the resulting
highly radioactive chemical gunk.

This is not to say that there have not been various proposals
as to how this waste might be stored.

For example:
There have been efforts to store this waste deep
underground,
such as happened in Germany.

The trouble is that none of these supposed ‘solutions’ will
ever work.

Just storing the waste while it is still undergoing a chemical
reaction is not the brightest idea as to what might be done
with it in the short to medium term.

Never mind the long lived radioactivity which is just another
problem which future generations are going to have to deal
with  !!!

So some of the recent developments within Cumbria should be
regarded with alarm.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is looking to axe
jobs.

As with all the various UK government agencies financial cuts
are on the way.

This means job losses.

Depending upon which reports you read,
both within the NDA and at Windscale this will effect between
90 and 1,200 workers.  *

Continue reading Cuts In Cumbria – A Chemical Story

Pensions or Here’s The Deal….

For a lot of people on low salaries there is but one
compensation to be had,
and that is a reasonable pension,
or at least one which does not mean living in dire poverty
after retirement.

One of the consequences of low pay is never being able to
own ones own property,
and so having to pay rent until the day one dies.

Work in libraries and you will both earn far less that an
average salary,
and never be able to own the place you live in.

Now both the UK government,
and many financial bodies are claiming that all public sector
workers are receiving pensions which are
‘Too generous’.

Not a word do they say about how state pensions are so low
that they are below the poverty line.

Not a word about increasing the level of public worker
pensions to that which is enjoyed by finance workers.

Not a word about giving ‘key worker’ status to all low paid
library workers.

Not a word upon the need to increase the level of state
pensions.

The self contradictions which result from all of the above
facts needs to be faced up to.

The choice is obvious in terms of preventing poverty in
retirement.

Either: –

– Pay library workers more in order that we may be able to
both purchase their own properties,
and save enough for their old age.

or

– Keep the present public sector pensions at the same levels.

Failure to do so will mean that yet more people will not be
able to undertake working in public libraries,
and we will all suffer as a result!

Insuring the Uninsurable.

Anyone who has ever had anything to do with Insurance will
tell you that it is all to do with assessing risks,
and measuring the amount of damage which  might or may of
occurred.

It may all look like a form of gambling on disasters not taking
place,
but it is all based upon a formular of tried and tested
statistical tables.

That’s why insurance policies are so complex,
and include so many exclusion clauses.

Break just one of those clauses,
or do something silly,
and your insurance claim becomes invalid.

Sometimes natural diasters occur.
In the old days they were refereed to as ‘Acts of God’.

Nature is unpredictable,
and you can never front see everything which might go wrong.

Even with the best insurance in the world,
all you will get is a ‘Replacing like for like’.

Yet you can’t replace human life.

Which brings me on to the question of nukiller power.

The construction and running of nukiller reactors involves
spending heap loads of money,
and still there is no way in which you can guarantee this will
make you a profit.

If they go wrong,
then it will cost even more money to clean up the resulting
ecological mess.

This is why most of the building of nukiller power reactors
has been underwritten by the state.

Now in these difficult economic times more and more
governments are becoming very reluctant to underpin the
finances of the nukiller industry.

While the industry is still pushing for more government
subsidies before committing themselves to building new
reactors.

They just don’t want to pay for the long term costs of
dismantling  the reactors,
or safely storing all of the radioactive waste.

Longer term the insure costs involved in the safe storage of
nukiller waste are also very unpredictable indeed.

It will take just one so called ‘accident’ to occur at a nukiller
waste storage plant for the insurance premium of all the rest
of these plants to become so very unrealistic high,
that most companies would not be able to pay for it all.

That in turn might mean that a lot of the Lloyds underwriters
may also become very reluctant to take on such high risks.

That is why just in insurance costs alone it would be
inadvisable for any one ,or any company, to put money in to
nukiller power industry.

Investing In Energy – Investing In The Future.

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking of late about the many
arguments against nukiller power,
and just how they need to be presented to people.

Of course the most persuasive argument against nukes is that
of a radioactive future,
and just how much nukiller power equates to the building of
nukiller weapons.

Yet there are a couple of other arguments which do need to be
stated.

For example:

– Nukiller power is very far from being carbon neutral.
This being a result of the way that uranium is mined, processed,
and transported.

– Nukiller power can never provide any country fuel security.
It can only continue as part of global industry.

&

– That there is no economic justification for building nukes.
Investing in nukes means taking a lot of long term economic
risks, which both governments and the insurance industry are
starting to become very concerned about.

While the economic investment returns upon building wind
turbines are much greater.

Ditto from making fiscal savings from home insulation,
and energy saving technologies.

While I’ll be helping to encourage more Nonviolent direct
action against ( NVDA ) nukiller power over the next few
years,
I’ll also be showing to potential investors that there is a lot
more money to be made & saved by investing in the alternatives.

Palestinian Waters

Just like many other people I’m very critical of the World Bank,
but just once in a while they do produce some interesting reports.

One that caught my eye of late is
world bank report 47657-gz .

‘WEST BANK AND GAZA
ASSESSMENT OF RESTRICTIONS ON PALESTINIAN
WATER SECTOR DEVELOPMENT.’

Water supply & waste disposal are very fundemental needs for most people,
but given the political structure of the area,
then how these services are delivered presents major problems all around.

Maybe it’s not the most imaginative of titles,
but the contents do illustrate a lot of the fundemental problems which occure within the
area.

McAlpine’s Fissile Fears.

Here is a song which needs to be updated with a current twist to it –

McAlpine’s Fusiliers.

The song tells about just what it used to like to work for
Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd.

The word Fusilier being for a soldier armed with a light flintlock musket.

Sir Robert McAlpine is well know as a construction company.

Some of the places which McAlpine’s have built include
Hunterston B
Hinkley Point B
&
Bradwell
Nukiller Power plants.

The company was also responsible for building the
Torness nukiller power plant.

During the construction of this reactor there was much opposition to the construction of the plant,
which included a Nonviolent Occupation of the site.

Sir Robert McAlpine’s parent company is Newarthill,
which is Privately owned.

According to a number of sources
McAlpine’s is lining itself up to build the next set of
proposed British nukiller reactors.

It looks like it’s now time to tell McAlpine’s just why
nukiller power is a Bad idea.

The ‘Greed is Good’ Argument Against Nukiller Power.

There are some arguments for doing the right thing which
sound almost counter intuitive.

For example:

If one were to establish a Ron & Reggie Kray memorial institute
for the victims of knife crimes.

or

By promoting the ‘Greed is Good’ argument against nukiller
power.

Yet this is not a counter intuitive argument in economic terms.

Given all the hidden costs of nukiller power,
plus all of the long term costs of storing and safeguarding the
radioactive waste,
then it is very hard to see how anyone could ever make a profit
without the tax payer shoulder the long term costs.

No wonder the companies involved in the industry are arguing
so strongly that we poor tax payers should pay for all the
unprofitable parts of the industry.

Just look at the insurance rates for each reactor.

At a time when there is going to be so much social harm as a
result of cuts in government spending,
is it really reasonable to keep subsidising the nukiller power
industry ?

Last year George Soros pledged to put his money into helping to
stop global warming from carbon emissions.

Just keep in mind that the nukiller power industry also
generates a lot of carbon emissions,

Whether the Soros fund will also be used to help campaign against
the building of new nukiller reactors remains to be seen?

We still have to find out.

What we really need is more people like Soros coming out
against the building of nukiller reactors.

There is a lot of money at stake in terms of the nukiller power
industry,
but better returns are to be made by the alternatives.