just think of what 40 years of generating 1,500Mw of power from a coal fired power plant brings compared to nuclear. There's no comparison. Believers are modern day Luddites who want to stop the progress of technology and force us to go back to living in caves.
"The carbon footprint of a nuclear power station – the average level of greenhouse gas emissions it is responsible for over its lifetime, from construction to decommissioning – is about 16 grams of carbon dioxide-equivalent for each kilowatt-hour of electricity it generates (gCO2e/kWh)." http://www.edfenergy.com/energyfuture/en...
However you should keep in mind the source of this study. It would also be important to take into consideration what things are included. The actual site of the nuclear power station is relatively small but the wider area used for the site in case of emergencies can be far larger than for a similar sized solar power station. What is being done with the land? There are just over 400 nuclear power stations in the world. 2 have had major accidents in 60 years. Do all the others take into consideration a portion of what was spent in carbon recovering from those accidents?
The concrete is made by heating the lime to very high temps. The metals are the same. All is recyclable which lowers the foot print. Nuclear energy also does not put pollutants into the air. Only steam.
Making solar panels involves many chemicals that are dumped into the environment. Also uses heat created from coal with unscrubbed emissions. Still solar panels are highly ineffective for most homes unless you live in a desert and have batteries.
Windmills create a noise many people complain about. They kill birds. The electromagnetic field keeps earthworms away when placed in crop fields.
I don't understand why hydro electric isn't considered green.
Probably about the same as the equivalent number of solar panels. Both nuclear and solar industries need to ween themselves of of fossil fuels, just like the rest of us.
Looking at it from the standpoint of electric production and reliability, a nuke plant's CF is tiny compared to wind/solar.
Wind and Solar are horribly expensive, ineffective, knee-jerk reactions to alternate energy.....just like ethanol was.
Another Dorster question. Since he blocks most people with intelligence it is only far to let everyone respond.
