Re: [Paddlewise] CO2 output

From: Tord Eriksson <tord_at_tord.nu>
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 07:26:37 +0200
On Monday 02 July 2007 02:14, you wrote:
> This is, prima facie, an utterly ridiculous statement.
>
> On 7/1/07, Tord Eriksson <tord_at_tord.nu> wrote:
> > Learned a long time ago that you use more fossil fuel energy to
> > build and run a nuclear reactor during its entire active life, than
> > the electricity it produces!

Oh, is it?! Considering the millions of tons concrete that is needed, and 
knowing how concrete is made, it sure uses up a lot of energy, plus
all the metal, transports, et cetera, I am not that sure it isn't correct.

But in those days a nuclear power station had a practical life of 20 years,
now they more like 50, or more! But the older they get the more service
they need, and the higher is the risk for something catstorphic to happen.

What irritates me more is the conclusion that electric cars, boats, even 
planes (all three kind exist, as you probably know) are good for the 
environment, as the losses involved are massive (for instance charging 
batteries usually involve a 40% loss in the form of heat), and in most 
places the power stations feeding the battery chargers involved spews out 
massive amounts of CO2, NOX and sulphur (the latter two can be lessened
by advanced technology, but just a minority of the world's powerplants
have access to sulphur free fuel). 

Switching to only nuclear power would at least quaddruple (sp?) the number
of nuclear plants needed, which in turn does the same with the risks and
the amount of waste produced, that nobody wants to take care of.

I'll applaud the day when all our energy needs come from wind power,
photovoltaic power and solar panels for heating - we sure are a long way 
off!

And in the event of war I want as few nuclear installations as possible,
world wide, and I, for one, don't see a future where no nuclear countries
(like Sverige (aka Sweden), La France, the US, et cetera) aren't involved 
in war (one way or other - Sweden has troops in Afghanistan - under US 
command), or exposed to terrorism (one's terrorist, the other's freedom 
fighter). 

What use of going paddling in a radioactive sea?! I will not, for sure,
enjoy paddling in a dead sea, with no seals, no fish, no birds nor any 
whales!

Tord S Eriksson,
Sweden
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
Received on Sun Jul 01 2007 - 22:16:26 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:31:25 PDT