NukeWorker Forum

News and Discussions => Nuke News => Topic started by: Marlin on May 27, 2015, 09:27

Title: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Marlin on May 27, 2015, 09:27
Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission, But Neither Is Anything Else

(http://content.science20.com/files/images/life_cycle_emissions_of_different_energy_types.jpg)

http://www.science20.com/the_conversation/nuclear_power_isnt_really_zeroemission_but_neither_is_anything_else-155694
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: OldHP on May 28, 2015, 12:49
Thus has always been so!  After visiting a vintage plant in the early '70's' to cut a 'test specimen', they weren't ready when we got there, thus getting a tour, and seeing their Unit 1 Ash Ponds roped off, I thought to myself, "If you ever go to the commercial nuclear, make sure you have all your bases covered"!

A few years later I found myself as the RPM (then Station HP) at a ready (but for TMI) to start up plant.  As I started to go through the data I found that the emissions from an up lake coal plant weren't taken into account and then when I insisted on additional water samples found major Tritium (right in our discharge path).  It turned out that an unlicensed producer of 3H dials was dumping into the lake!

We, the nuclear industry, are very small producers, close to natural (although there are those that say, 'there is no natural radioactivity', I invite them to take a 'calibrated' meter and accompany me to the quarries of RI or VT, or anywhere (the government) buildings are constructed of 'the stone', i.e. DC).

The earth emits a certain amount of radioactivity every second, minute, hour, day, etc., we (humankind) have dealt with it and benefited from it since before all who post here have, even me, were a glimmer in their daddy's eye , and all the generations before us. 
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Content1 on May 30, 2015, 09:12
I think  when most think of zero emission, it refers to greenhouse gasses.  When compared to coal or natural gas, we are effectively at zero emissions carbon.
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Marlin on May 30, 2015, 10:14
Quote from: Content1 on May 30, 2015, 09:12
I think  when most think of zero emission, it refers to greenhouse gasses.  When compared to coal or natural gas, we are effectively at zero emissions carbon.

  Greenhouse gas is what the article is talking about but it includes the entire life cycle of each, so even solar and wind have some emmisions in fabrication, transportation, and construction. if you look at the mean per KWH nuclear is very close to solar and wind.
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Rerun on May 30, 2015, 12:31
A 24 hour diesel run is more than a fossil plant emits in about 3 weeks..
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: dea on May 31, 2015, 09:36
Nice comment Rerun, care to provide some data to back it up.
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Bonds 25 on May 31, 2015, 10:33
Quote from: Rerun on May 30, 2015, 12:31
A 24 hour diesel run is more than a fossil plant emits in about 3 weeks..


Hahahahahahah
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Rerun on May 31, 2015, 12:13
I have signed the emmissions reports for both
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Bonds 25 on May 31, 2015, 02:13
Oh, well that's outstanding proof right there. You also "know" that Nuclear Power kills more people and is more dangerous than fossils too........
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Rerun on Jun 01, 2015, 09:59
How many died at Chernobyl ?
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Rerun on Jun 01, 2015, 10:00
The carbon emmissions free has always been one of the biggest nuclear myths .
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: hamsamich on Jun 01, 2015, 10:24
Yeah good thinking let's compare Chernobyl to western nuclear power.  And you're saying nuclear power puts out C emission?  Stop digging!  someone with your high and mighty brain should be able to do better than that!  that would be just as cheesy as saying the polonium your fossils put out is worse than our nuclear fuel.  Wow, waiting for some real comebacks.
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Bonds 25 on Jun 01, 2015, 10:38
Quote from: Rerun on Jun 01, 2015, 09:59
How many died at Chernobyl ?

<50 directly with the potential for more (4000 total) if you use the ridiculous, horribly conservative, debunked LNT model.....compared to the hundreds of thousands of people fossils have killed since Chernobyl. Yeah, great comparison.....

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Rerun on Jun 01, 2015, 12:38
It's funny people will state there is no way to prove radiation kills anyone yet will gladly say other industries kill people. Last I checked there were lots of fire fighters killed fighting the Chernobyl Fire and most likely more died afterward .
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Bonds 25 on Jun 01, 2015, 01:07
I JUST showed you the Chernobyl casualties. That was from the World Health Organization.  How dense are you?

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs313/en/
Title: Re: Nuclear Power Isn't Really Zero-emission
Post by: Nuclear NASCAR on Jun 01, 2015, 04:07
Just a little reminder:  ;)

4. Please learn to be respectful, tolerate and support each other.  NukeWorker.com's goal is to help others, not see how many people we can annoy. Do not initiate arguments or tension. This will only cause the triggering of other members and make this site less professional.