Comments on: Obama Goes Nuclear: What happened to clean energy? http://triplecrisis.com/obama-goes-nuclear/ Global Perspectives on Finance, Development, and Environment Sat, 04 Feb 2012 01:04:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Laci http://triplecrisis.com/obama-goes-nuclear/comment-page-1/#comment-398892 Laci Mon, 22 Aug 2011 05:44:02 +0000 http://triplecrisis.com/?p=252#comment-398892 Most of whatever you say is supprisingly appropriate and that makes me ponder why I hadn't looked at this in this light previously. This piece really did switch the light on for me as far as this topic goes. Nevertheless at this time there is actually just one factor I am not necessarily too cozy with and while I make an effort to reconcile that with the core idea of the position, let me see just what the rest of the visitors have to say.Nicely done. Most of whatever you say is supprisingly appropriate and that makes me ponder why I hadn’t looked at this in this light previously. This piece really did switch the light on for me as far as this topic goes. Nevertheless at this time there is actually just one factor I am not necessarily too cozy with and while I make an effort to reconcile that with the core idea of the position, let me see just what the rest of the visitors have to say.Nicely done.

]]> By: Garrett Connelly http://triplecrisis.com/obama-goes-nuclear/comment-page-1/#comment-140 Garrett Connelly Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:33:42 +0000 http://triplecrisis.com/?p=252#comment-140 Nuclear power at the plant itself emits very little greenhouse gas pollution. It does emit an invisible mix of radioactive elements which are bio-active building blocks (Strontium mimics Calcium in the body, for example). Very little is said about the daily release of radioactive pollution. The Diablo Canyon nuclear power generator, in California, for example emits pollution that radiates at 24,000 curries into the air annually. Sure, only 50% of that is bio-active, even so, if that level of radiation was emitting from fissionable material, it would be sufficient to create ten WWII sized atom bombs per year. That's the biologically active pollution from one nuclear reactor per year, and it's cumulative. Nuclear power at the plant itself emits very little greenhouse gas pollution. It does emit an invisible mix of radioactive elements which are bio-active building blocks (Strontium mimics Calcium in the body, for example). Very little is said about the daily release of radioactive pollution. The Diablo Canyon nuclear power generator, in California, for example emits pollution that radiates at 24,000 curries into the air annually. Sure, only 50% of that is bio-active, even so, if that level of radiation was emitting from fissionable material, it would be sufficient to create ten WWII sized atom bombs per year. That’s the biologically active pollution from one nuclear reactor per year, and it’s cumulative.

]]> By: Barry O'Riordan http://triplecrisis.com/obama-goes-nuclear/comment-page-1/#comment-125 Barry O'Riordan Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:54:03 +0000 http://triplecrisis.com/?p=252#comment-125 According to James Lovelock in his book The Revenge of Gaia the price of human lives per terrawatt year is as follows: Coal 342 Natural Gas 85 Hydro 883 Nuclear 8 He also strongly urges us to use nuclear as we won't be able to reduce our CO2 levels to a more reasonable level (to avoid up to 5 degree celsius increas in world temperature)with out it. He is strongly pro nuclear but also an environmentalist, and he makes a strong argument that is worth checking out. Also see his book The vanishing face of Gaia According to James Lovelock in his book The Revenge of Gaia the price of human lives per terrawatt year is as follows:
Coal 342
Natural Gas 85
Hydro 883
Nuclear 8

He also strongly urges us to use nuclear as we won’t be able to reduce our CO2 levels to a more reasonable level (to avoid up to 5 degree celsius increas in world temperature)with out it. He is strongly pro nuclear but also an environmentalist, and he makes a strong argument that is worth checking out. Also see his book The vanishing face of Gaia

]]> By: Jose Ferreira http://triplecrisis.com/obama-goes-nuclear/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Jose Ferreira Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:09:21 +0000 http://triplecrisis.com/?p=252#comment-96 Nuclear plants kill people, as we have known since Chernobyl. Dams can burst and kill people. Coal-fired plants release cancerigenous particles into the atmosphere; people die as a consequence. Even windmills can kill people, for all I know: imagine one of those huge blades getting lose and landing on someone's house. As far as I know, solar plants don't kill anyone; they only take up lots of space, which the United States can easily afford but other countries can not. What about reckoning the price of electricity by human lives per megawatt instead of dollars per megawatt? Nuclear plants kill people, as we have known since Chernobyl. Dams can burst and kill people. Coal-fired plants release cancerigenous particles into the atmosphere; people die as a consequence. Even windmills can kill people, for all I know: imagine one of those huge blades getting lose and landing on someone’s house.

As far as I know, solar plants don’t kill anyone; they only take up lots of space, which the United States can easily afford but other countries can not.

What about reckoning the price of electricity by human lives per megawatt instead of dollars per megawatt?

]]>