Nuclear and effect of Serre: GHG CO2 and EDF ...

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 03/12/10, 16:42

jlt22 wrote:A site answering all your questions about nuclear power:

http://www.stormsmith.nl/

Small update on this subject ...

Jlt22 found an interesting site. Here are 2 hard-uploaded links on econology that join the comparative study of CO2 emissions from the nuclear life cycle that I published on page 1.

So here are 2 really interesting links

Presentation by Storm Van Leeuven
where it is developed the (probable) idea that the drop in quality of uranium deposits will soon lead to CO2 pollution from nuclear power equivalent to that of fossil hydrocarbons.

this article in German from Energie & Umwelt
explaining that nuclear in the medium term is neither a solution for energy, nor for the climate.

Articles are from Jan Willem Storm Van Leeuven who is an experienced and speechless Dutch scientist on energy issues.

@+
0 x
Image
User avatar
vinzman
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 193
Registration: 01/07/09, 16:35
Location: Quebec




by vinzman » 18/02/12, 08:11

Image
0 x
User avatar
Philippe Schutt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1611
Registration: 25/12/05, 18:03
Location: Alsace
x 33




by Philippe Schutt » 18/02/12, 13:18

You don't think we are going to re-burn all the waste with the 4th generation plants, like the "Astrid" project.

And always sodium, too. not even afraid
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 18/02/12, 19:16

6000tons of sodium in Superphenix !!

And look how a gram of sodium burns in water !!!

To measure the madness of our infallible nuclear super-mans !!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by Christophe » 02/02/18, 11:38

1 x
Bardal
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 509
Registration: 01/07/16, 10:41
Location: 56 and 45
x 198

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by Bardal » 02/02/18, 20:32

Interesting to read this little self of anti nuk:

chr: it's horrible the nuk
cpt m:: I would say even more, it's horrible
chr: I confirm
rem: I knew it but I like to hear it repeat
cpt m: read this ...
chr; but that's what I put, in prettier, three posts higher ...
cpt m: ah, I hadn't read, but I agreed ...
rem: ah la la la la
chr: finally, we agree
anonymus: all this should be made known ...
...
...
...
alterus: don't forget sodium, what are they stupid
chr: we don't forget; you saw how it burns
Conclusionnus: fortunately we are here to advance the debate

Well then say ... this is debate !!!
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by Remundo » 02/02/18, 20:43

and you know what Bardal? The nucleus are even more desperate! : Mrgreen:
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by Christophe » 08/10/21, 21:33

1 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by Christophe » 09/10/21, 01:24

Update of the method: we would be at 89 gr / kWh for heating vs 180 ...

1 x
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: Nuclear and Greenhouse effect: GHG, CO2 and EDF ...




by ABC2019 » 09/10/21, 06:38

Christophe wrote:


I don't really see what your diagram brings to the nuclear vs RE comparison, but I think the comparison depends on what is called CO2 content - the main problem with renewable energies is not the CO2 content of the kWh product, but it is the intermittence which obliges to provide thermal power stations in back-up. If we did everything with biogas for example, it would be much less serious, but as in practice we have largely not enough, we burn coal and fossil gas when there is no wind and sun, and ultimately we save much less CO2 than nuclear power. It is obvious when we compare France and Germany.
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 311 guests