City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

Marvin said:
Fission reactors. Not fusion. The cost of building Hinckley C is £20 billion. And then consider that its waste will need storing for a million years. Long term underground. But then that needs to be the size of manchester 300 m or more below ground. Massive technological undertaking that no society on earth has yet go to grips with. there are plans, and some are close, but none have been successfully implemented. The Germans are scrapping nuclear power. The Chinese are embracing it. Different nations have different policies. UAE probably like all emerging nations is trying to secure minds and develop its human potential. Smart move, but for me, fission technology is flawed. The cost of making fission nuclear power work are enormous because no one considers the long term problem of waste storage.
Click to expand...
Calling @andyhinch to the thread.
 
Marvin said:
Fission reactors. Not fusion. The cost of building Hinckley C is £20 billion. And then consider that its waste will need storing for a million years. Long term underground. But then that needs to be the size of manchester 300 m or more below ground. Massive technological undertaking that no society on earth has yet go to grips with. there are plans, and some are close, but none have been successfully implemented. The Germans are scrapping nuclear power. The Chinese are embracing it. Different nations have different policies. UAE probably like all emerging nations is trying to secure minds and develop its human potential. Smart move, but for me, fission technology is flawed. The cost of making fission nuclear power work are enormous because no one considers the long term problem of waste storage.
Click to expand...

Instead of putting it deep in the ground with the growth of commercial space travel could we simply not float it off into deep space? I suppose the ramifications of a rocket exploding on the launch pad or in the atmosphere laiden with spent nuclear waste wouldn’t make it feasible.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Instead of putting it deep in the ground with the growth of commercial space travel could we simply not float it off into deep space? I suppose the ramifications of a rocket exploding on the launch pad or in the atmosphere laiden with spent nuclear waste wouldn’t make it feasible.
Click to expand...
Deep underground or alternatively there is a possibility of sticking the long term waste back in a reactor, turning into more reactive waste but waste that has a shorter half life and hence is easier to manage. Bury it under Old Trafford.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Instead of putting it deep in the ground with the growth of commercial space travel could we simply not float it off into deep space? I suppose the ramifications of a rocket exploding on the launch pad or in the atmosphere laiden with spent nuclear waste wouldn’t make it feasible.
Click to expand...
I think when the 1st rocket accidently explodes in the atmosphere/Ionosphere spreading radioactive material around the globe, that it'll be decided that it's probably not the best idea for disposal.

Get a space elevator working, then maybe that's the safest way of getting stuff from surface to space, but that'll be nigh on impossible - even if technology makes it happen, coz any nation who isn't in control of it, will see that it's the end of them as a nation.
 
ccr said:
Beer on tap and busty barmaids. A small room at the back so the little lady can do her cooking, washing and ironing.
I'll get my coat.............
Click to expand...

Think solar panels should be the norm like having smoke detectors are now but wasn’t years ago
 
Marvin said:
Fission reactors. Not fusion. The cost of building Hinckley C is £20 billion. And then consider that its waste will need storing for a million years. Long term underground. But then that needs to be the size of manchester 300 m or more below ground. Massive technological undertaking that no society on earth has yet go to grips with. there are plans, and some are close, but none have been successfully implemented. The Germans are scrapping nuclear power. The Chinese are embracing it. Different nations have different policies. UAE probably like all emerging nations is trying to secure minds and develop its human potential. Smart move, but for me, fission technology is flawed. The cost of making fission nuclear power work are enormous because no one considers the long term problem of waste storage.
Click to expand...
Frackings the future, I tell ya
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Instead of putting it deep in the ground with the growth of commercial space travel could we simply not float it off into deep space? I suppose the ramifications of a rocket exploding on the launch pad or in the atmosphere laiden with spent nuclear waste wouldn’t make it feasible.
Click to expand...
Nah, send it to France instead.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
Instead of putting it deep in the ground with the growth of commercial space travel could we simply not float it off into deep space? I suppose the ramifications of a rocket exploding on the launch pad or in the atmosphere laiden with spent nuclear waste wouldn’t make it feasible.
Click to expand...

Couldn't we just leave it in Liverpool ? would anyone know ?



and more to the point, would they care ?
 
First of all I am not to bothered about this but I was wondering how sustainable our spending was with the new type of FFP coming in. Seen some figures that we have spend circa £290m net the past two seasons on transfers with wages on top. It looks like we could be spending at least another £100m on players this summer. Are we balancing the books ? I know United have spent big but no one else has come close ? Is this because our revenue is much higher than Arsenal or Chelsea now? Or are we spending the money the club got from the 10% sale to the Chinese firm a couple of seasons ago. Cheers
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
First of all I am not to bothered about this but I was wondering how sustainable our spending was with the new type of FFP coming in. Seen some figures that we have spend circa £290m net the past two seasons on transfers with wages on top. It looks like we could be spending at least another £100m on players this summer. Are we balancing the books ? I know United have spent big but no one else has come close ? Is this because our revenue is much higher than Arsenal or Chelsea now? Or are we spending the money the club got from the 10% sale to the Chinese firm a couple of seasons ago. Cheers
Click to expand...
We've turned a profit for the last three or four years.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
First of all I am not to bothered about this but I was wondering how sustainable our spending was with the new type of FFP coming in. Seen some figures that we have spend circa £290m net the past two seasons on transfers with wages on top. It looks like we could be spending at least another £100m on players this summer. Are we balancing the books ? I know United have spent big but no one else has come close ? Is this because our revenue is much higher than Arsenal or Chelsea now? Or are we spending the money the club got from the 10% sale to the Chinese firm a couple of seasons ago. Cheers
Click to expand...
Incidently, when a club is sold, the shareholders receive the money, not the club. So in this case, ADUG would get the proceeds of a sale of CFG shares.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top