Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
JORDAN’S NUCLEAR REGULATORY Commission has given the go-ahead for a first nuclear research reactor as the desert kingdom, which lacks any oil, seeks to meet its energy needs.
The five-megawatt reactor will be built at the Jordan University for Sciences and Technology near the northern city of Irbid, commission chief Majad Hawwari said.
“The approval of the project came after two years of studies and examination,” Hawwari said in a statement.
The Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute and Daewoo Engineering and Construction Company will construct the reactor, which is scheduled to become operational in 2016, he added.
“The reactor will help the commission build expertise and capabilities to prepare for constructing nuclear power plants in the future,” Hawwari said.
Jordanian officials have said the reactor will cost $130 million (€97 million) and that South Korea has loaned the equivalent of €52 million.
Amman is currently weighing rival bids to build the reactor by Russia’s Atomstroyexport and a consortium led by French nuclear giant Areva and Japan’s Mitsubishi.
With desert covering 92 per cent of its territory, the kingdom is one of the world’s 10 driest countries and wants to use atomic energy to fire desalination plants to overcome its crippling water shortage.
Importing 98 per cent of its power needs, Jordan also wants to develop nuclear technology to meet its growing energy requirements.
But the technology remains deeply sensitive in a region where Israel has an undeclared monopoly on nuclear weapons and Western governments have strong suspicions that Iran has an ambition to rival it.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Friday’s answer = 11
Why?
The written numbers are the number of digital lines making up the preceding number.
It was too simple! Pointless really…
I got it by chance. I saw the difference between the pairs of digital numbers was 6, 6, 12, 12. I thought then the penned in numbers had a similar pattern 7, 9, 9, 11. I thought there must be another 11 then. The real reason makes more sense but it’s funny how this worked out.
Maybe yours is the real reason and mine is by chance.
We’ll probably never know.
Did the same as Mr Dragmire.
You still recognised the pattern Mr dragmire.
Geez, no explanation for Friday’s answer which wasn’t a maths puzzle and no clarification for Tuesday’s mess up either, ending with a whimper.
Tuesday’s was OK – the absence of explanation was unfortunate.
Half the children had a dog – so their can’t be 25 or 27 children, other wise you have half a dog!
So there were either 15 or 26 Dogs
But there were 3 times as many dogs as cats – so which of 15 & 26 is divisible by 3?
OK
15 dogs, 5 cats, 8 goldfish & 2 hamsters – 30 pets – and also 30 children.
It wanted number of pets not number of students. 24 students would have 25 pets between them and 30 students would have 30 pets between them. The only conditions are that total #students must be divisible by 6 and that total #pets must be divisible by 5.
Tuesdays answer could have been 25 also. 12 dogs, 4 cats, 7 goldfish & 2 hamsters equal 25.
All the people that got their knickers in a twist on Tuesday can now un twist them :)
But they haven’t cleared up the confusion despite the reams of comments pointing out their mistake.
What was their mistake on Tuesday? I can’t see one.
With the way the question was phrased both 25 and 30 are possible answers.
The answer is dependant on the assumption that each child only has one pet. It may seem trivial but saying that half the children have dogs doesn’t help at all without that knowledge. It should have just said half the pets are dogs or made it clear that each child had only one pet.
Ok – I see how that could be possible if you allow for a pupil having two pets.
A bit of a contrived gripe in my view.
Not really contrived in my opinion. That caught me up as well until I said fe<k it and just made the assumption. I wrote it in my copy book and everything. Really should have stated it in the question.
Has Jane found out how many kids were in that classroom ? Classic!!
Have you figured out that 72 isn’t the answer to today’s one?
Yes I have ,Leopold.
4/5 not bad, water one got me.
water a vexed question right now – especially if one is asked to pay for it.
Professor layton; journal style
I thought the teeth brushing one was poorly worded. I got the “correct” answer if I based the time on 50 mins ie subtracting the rinsing time.
Seconds not mins!
72 should have been the right answer ..
72 is the right answer if you’re looking at the big numbers.
But the next number will be one of the faint numbers.
I think it’s 11.
If you loop the faint numbers, skipping one number each time, you get 11.
The 7 goes with the second 9
And the first 9 goes with the first 11
So the next loop would make it 7 to 9 to 11. The loops are overlapping
a
have your say