Caithness man killed in accident at windfarm

[NNadir]

A contractor who died while carrying out maintenance work on a turbine at a Caithness windfarm was named last night as 27-year-old Colin Sinclair.

A spokesman for Northern Constabulary said he was from Calder Drive, Thurso.

Fire brigade, ambulance and police attended the RWE npower renewables’ 24-turbine windfarm on the Causewaymire after reports of an accident shortly after 9am yesterday.

The Sea King helicopter from RAF Lossiemouth was also called out and a winchman was lowered with a stretcher to an access door at the top of the 200ft tower.

Mr Sinclair died at the scene a short time later, despite efforts to revive him.

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/north/123559-man-killed-in-wind-farm-accident-named/">Man killed in wind farm accident named.

Wind provides a trivial portion of Scotland's energy.




Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1400260?UserKey=#ixzz0kMCSaK3H

[opihimoimoi]

1. The price of energy is never cheap....sad for the man... what are the preventive measures under way?

[truebrit71]

2. How many people have died because of the leaked radiation from the turbines?

Um. None. Because if one of them break chances are very slim that anyone wil get hurt.

Not quite the case with your beloved nukes though eh?

:eyes:

[Systematic Chaos]

4. So where are all these people who have died because of nuclear energy?

Surely that awesome post of yours can be backed up with some actual figures and statistics?

Shall I pack a lunch and bring a book or a handheld gaming device along to while away the time you spend preparing this data?

[truebrit71]

5. Where are they? They're dead.

Google is your friend...enjoy your lunch too...:eyes:

[Statistical]

6. Not a single member of public has been killed by commercial nuclear energy in the US.

50 years.
Over 50 million combined operating hours.
0 fatalities.

[Systematic Chaos]

11. It's your friend too.

Unless you can't find one thing on it to support your position when someone calls you out on it.

Then, instead of actually providing links to articles, you make a snappy comeback like "Google is your friend...enjoy your lunch too... :eyes: "

Wow, pure talent.

[truebrit71]

12. Not really..I'll google it for you..very first article below..how's that lunch?

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/index.html

Snappy enough?

:eyes:

[Systematic Chaos]

13. So you're trying to tell me that every nuke plant is built just like Chernobyl?

You want me to believe that every nuke plant in the US -- despite being built to safety standards light years ahead of those at Chernobyl -- is going to have a disaster just like that one?

Chernobyl was a product of poor design and outright stupidity on the part of the Russian government. It has nothing to do with modern reactor designs, or even older plants operating throughout the world today.

Sorry there were deaths in the USSR due to lack of concern for safety, but that is something that is unlikely to ever happen again.

Oh, and by the way, why don't you Google how many people have died as a result of fossil fuel burning since the Chernobyl disaster? Since you're like, so awesome at it, and stuff? :D

[Nederland]

8. How many birds have been killed by spinning blades at reactors?

um. None.

See how easy it is to play this game? See how stupid the game is?

The bottom line is that both wind power and nuclear power have both caused very few or zero deaths, depending on what region you include and whether or not you distinguish between civilians and plant employees. Certainly the number of deaths per GWHr generated favors nuclear--but IMHO that is not the real issue. The important thing is that both of these sources of power are far, far better than any fossil fuel option out there. Why can't we all just agree on that and agree that we should replace coal, oil, and natural gas with solar, wind, and nuclear?

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. Gee, I wonder how many died from pollution

caused by burning fossil fuels. I wonder how many aquatic animals have died transporting oil on the oceans.

And lastly, I wonder how many millions of people have died in the wars for coal, oil and natural gas.

[madokie]

7. Theres a lot of people dying for a lot of reasons

for the pro nukie to say show me a person who has died due to nuclear energy and say it like it's true is laughable on its face and in the face of those who talk the shit. The incidence of cancers is way up down wind of TMI for instance. The Navaho's would kick his/spouter of no one has died bushshit, lying ass I'll guarantee you that. The Nuclear power industry has and apparently will continue to not take responsibility for anything at all except that they do produce lots of electrical energy and a shitpot full of hot water. If you'll notice they build them where there is an abundunce of water, why is that? Because they use a lot of water in keeping things under control, keeping that big bang just a fissile, if you will. Fuk the nuke industry and the horse of death they ride in on.

[Nederland]

9. Link?

I'm curious to see what you mean by "the incidence of cancers is way up down wind of TMI".

[madokie]

10. Go to the google and do a little research

I have and I came to the conclusion I did so you do the same and see what you get

[FBaggins]

14. "Cancer and three mile island: no significant increase in five-mile radius"

'Although exposures were later determined to be minimal, the state of the science at the time implicated low-level radiation in cancers and raised fears about increases in radiation-induced cancers among residents living near TMI. However, there has been no statistically significant elevation in overall cancer deaths among people living within a five-mile radius of TMI at the time of the accident, according to a 20-year follow-up study published this month by Evelyn O. Talbott and colleagues from the University of Pittsburgh ."

...snip...


"Although the Pittsburgh team found no statistically significant rise in cancer deaths, there was a slight increase in overall mortality among the TMI population, with the deaths due primarily to heart disease. However, the heart disease is not thought to be related to radiation exposure, but rather is most likely due to the population having well-established heart disease risk factors (such as smoking and socioeconomic status) that were not measured. Another possible factor is the stress of living within the plant's shadow following the accident.

The study is particularly important because it is one of only a very few on the health effects of low-level radiation, particularly at these lowest levels of exposure. The study is also valuable for the particularly high integrity of its data: 20-year follow-up mortality data exist for 98.2% of the TMI cohort. The authors recommend, among other things, continued monitoring of the childhood population near TMI and continued follow-up on mortality for the TMI cohort beyond the original cutoff of 31 December 1998, especially as some cancers have a longer latency period."




http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=L9YGTvChWnmyQ4Qy8xhPJhjB5z4GSbGZcKZF1jBpmnyPQJ0S7hZT!1781015534!-551696119?docId=5001915180

[Dead_Parrot]

15. I'm going to kick back and raise a glass to Colin

'Cos no other bugger will.

Rest easy, Mr Sinclair.

:hug: