> than fossil fuels if the entire process from
> uranium mining to waste disposal is included)
While all the assertions seem questionable, this particular claim has always kicked off my BS meter.
Even if one assumes that the entire mining and disposal process is necessarily fueled by fossil fuels (which is obviously unfair) it's hard to believe this is possible. It's specifically the huge net energy return on nuclear fuel that makes it attractive. However, the claim that nuclear power is dirtier than fossil fuels as regards carbon emissions requires that the net energy return on nuclear fuels is negative.
If the carbon released in the recovery and disposal process were greater than the carbon released in generating an equivalent amount of power from fossil fuel, then it would seem that (since the actual energy-production process is carbon neutral) the energy required to recover and dispose of the nuclear fuel would be greater than the energy released by the nuclear fission process.
It seems to me that this would imply you would have a much stronger argument than the ones you present, i.e., that there is no energy gain in fission; i.e., in practice, no such thing as nuclear power.
Am I missing something? Because if I'm not, you have not gone very far in convincing me that your position is based on sound arguments.
mt
On 10/1/06, Jim Torson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This book is now available:
http://www.helencaldicott.com/books.htm#newbook
NUCLEAR POWER IS NOT THE ANSWER
Publisher: The New Press (2006); ISBN: 978-1-59558-067-2
Scribe Publications (2002); ISBN:0908011652
Melbourne University Press: ISBN 0522 85251 3
In a world torn apart by wars over oil, many
politicians are increasingly looking for
alternative sources of energy - and their leading
choice is often nuclear. Among the myths that
have been spread over the years about
nuclear-powered electricity are that it does not
cause global warming or pollution (i.e., that it
is "clean and green"), that it is inexpensive,
and that it is safe. But the facts belie the
barrage of nuclear industry propaganda:
* Nuclear power contributes to global warming
* The real costs of nuclear power are
prohibitive (and taxpayers pick up most of them)
* There's not enough uranium in the world to
sustain long-term nuclear power
* Potential for a catastrophic accident or
terrorist attack far outweighs any benefits.
Trained as a physician, and - after four decades
of antinuclear activism - thoroughly versed in
the science of nuclear energy, the bestselling
author of Nuclear Madness and Missile Envy here
turns her attention from nuclear bombs to nuclear
lightbulbs. As she makes meticulously clear in
this damning book, the world cannot withstand either.
The edition published by Melbourne University
Press contains a special preface for Australian readers.
-----------------
http://reviews.publishersweekly.com/bd.aspx?isbn=1595580670&pub=pw
Caldecott's latest antinuke book searingly
debunks the claim that the impending "nuclear
power renaissance," purported by some to be the
only answer to global warming, is "clean and
green." She covers all the bases, from the carbon
emitted in the creation of nuclear power (higher
than fossil fuels if the entire process from
uranium mining to waste disposal is included) to
the cost of nuclear plants (too high to be viable
without large government subsidies) and the
health risks and possibility of accidents and
terrorists' access (more than we'd like to
think). She also points out that, despite
proponents' assurances, we still haven't found a
safe place to store the waste materials for the
necessary thousands of years, and that
state-of-the-art nuclear plant technology is
still full of unresolved problems. Caldecott's
predictable alternative is also sensible: switch
to wind and other benign renewables, turn down
the thermostat, wear a sweater, use energy
efficient lights and dry clothes on the
clothesline. Detractors will complain that she is
strident and incendiary, but those who believe
that facts matter will want to read her
frighteningly convincing argument.(Sept.)
Copyright © 1997-2005 Reed Business Information,
a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
----------
Available from Barnes & Noble:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&isbn=1595580670&itm=8
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
