Mark Z. Jacobson
[…]
Here is why nuclear, fossils with CCS, and biofuels should be excluded.
[…]
For example, onshore wind and utility PV are now the cheapest forms of electricity in most countries, including the U.S. New nuclear today costs 4 to 6 times that of new solar or wind to produce the same electricity. Further, a nuclear plant takes 5 to 17 years longer between planning and operation than does a solar or wind farm.
Thus, every dollar spent on nuclear results in 1/5th the energy production and 5 to 17 years more coal and gas burning than if wind or solar were installed instead. This delay and lower energy production from new nuclear condemns millions more to die from air pollution, which today kills 4 to 9 million people worldwide.
By choosing to build several nuclear plants a decade ago that have yet to operate, China suffered an increase in its overall CO2 emissions by 1.4 percent between 2016 and 2017 rather than seeing a decrease of 3.4 percent if it had spent the money on wind and solar instead.
Given that many 100% renewable policies call for a full transition of electricity by 2035, and given the financial and time requirements of nuclear, it is all but impossible for any more than a few new nuclear plant to be in place in by then.
In terms of emissions, nuclear is not zero carbon. A new plant emits 9 to 37 times the carbon emissions over its life as onshore wind, partly due to the fossil fuels used in mining and refining uranium continuously and building the facility but more because coal and gas plants are emitting during the long planning-to-operation time of a nuclear plant.
Just as importantly, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there is “robust evidence and high agreement” that nuclear power raises concerns about weapons proliferation, core meltdown, creation and storage of radioactive waste, and land-use degradation from mining. Wind and solar power do not have these concerns.
Featured Topics / 特集
Latest Posts / 最新記事
- 福島第1原発事故 2審も東電に賠償命令 仙台高裁 via 毎日新聞 2021/01/26
- 福島第1原発 2、3号機の格納容器上部で約2~4京ベクレル 原子力規制委調査 via 毎日新聞 2021/01/26
- ‘Problems around Akkuyu NPP is so dire that, even the supporters of nuclear energy must object’ via YEŞİL GAZETE 2021/01/26
- Proposal could mean Millstone reactors could operate 20 years longer than expected via The Day 2021/01/25
- Why the United States should support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons via The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 2021/01/25
Discussion / 最新の議論
- Jasmine Willa on Japan’s anti-nuclear protesters find the going tough, despite Fukushima disaster via The Christian Science Monitor
- Vg on 3rd Anniversary of Fukushima: “accident” over, catastrophe continues via Nuclear Energy Information Service
- kissasian on **南相馬市立総合病院における白血病・がんその他の疾患推移 (2) via 渡辺悦司**
- Make Free Money on US Nuclear Disaster Could Be Worse than Fukushima, Experts Warn via News wire
- Mtba5i.com on A Second Letter from Jailed Professor Masaki Shimoji via Fukushima Voice
Archives / 月別アーカイブ
- January 2021 (79)
- December 2020 (104)
- November 2020 (126)
- October 2020 (122)
- September 2020 (66)
- August 2020 (63)
- July 2020 (56)
- June 2020 (70)
- May 2020 (54)
- April 2020 (85)
- March 2020 (88)
- February 2020 (97)
- January 2020 (130)
- December 2019 (75)
- November 2019 (106)
- October 2019 (138)
- September 2019 (102)
- August 2019 (99)
- July 2019 (76)
- June 2019 (52)
- May 2019 (92)
- April 2019 (121)
- March 2019 (174)
- February 2019 (146)
- January 2019 (149)
- December 2018 (38)
- November 2018 (51)
- October 2018 (89)
- September 2018 (118)
- August 2018 (194)
- July 2018 (22)
- June 2018 (96)
- May 2018 (240)
- April 2018 (185)
- March 2018 (106)
- February 2018 (165)
- January 2018 (241)
- December 2017 (113)
- November 2017 (198)
- October 2017 (198)
- September 2017 (226)
- August 2017 (219)
- July 2017 (258)
- June 2017 (240)
- May 2017 (195)
- April 2017 (176)
- March 2017 (115)
- February 2017 (195)
- January 2017 (180)
- December 2016 (116)
- November 2016 (115)
- October 2016 (177)
- September 2016 (178)
- August 2016 (158)
- July 2016 (201)
- June 2016 (73)
- May 2016 (195)
- April 2016 (183)
- March 2016 (201)
- February 2016 (154)
- January 2016 (161)
- December 2015 (141)
- November 2015 (153)
- October 2015 (212)
- September 2015 (163)
- August 2015 (189)
- July 2015 (178)
- June 2015 (150)
- May 2015 (175)
- April 2015 (155)
- March 2015 (153)
- February 2015 (132)
- January 2015 (158)
- December 2014 (109)
- November 2014 (192)
- October 2014 (206)
- September 2014 (206)
- August 2014 (208)
- July 2014 (178)
- June 2014 (155)
- May 2014 (209)
- April 2014 (242)
- March 2014 (190)
- February 2014 (170)
- January 2014 (227)
- December 2013 (137)
- November 2013 (164)
- October 2013 (200)
- September 2013 (255)
- August 2013 (198)
- July 2013 (208)
- June 2013 (231)
- May 2013 (174)
- April 2013 (156)
- March 2013 (199)
- February 2013 (191)
- January 2013 (173)
- December 2012 (92)
- November 2012 (198)
- October 2012 (229)
- September 2012 (207)
- August 2012 (255)
- July 2012 (347)
- June 2012 (230)
- May 2012 (168)
- April 2012 (116)
- March 2012 (150)
- February 2012 (198)
- January 2012 (292)
- December 2011 (251)
- November 2011 (252)
- October 2011 (364)
- September 2011 (288)
- August 2011 (513)
- July 2011 (592)
- June 2011 (253)
- May 2011 (251)
- April 2011 (571)
- March 2011 (494)
- February 2011 (1)
- December 2010 (1)
Top Topics / TOPトピック
anti-nuclear
Atomic Age
Capitalism
East Japan Earthquake + Fukushima
energy policy
EU
Hanford
health
Hiroshima/Nagasaki
Inequality
labor
Nuclear power
nuclear waste
Nuclear Weapons
Radiation exposure
Russia/Ukraine/Chernobyl
Safety
TEPCO
U.S.
UK
エネルギー政策
メディア
ロシア/ウクライナ/チェルノブイリ
健康
公正・共生
兵器
再稼働
労働における公正・平等
原子力規制委員会
原発推進
反原発運動
大飯原発
安全
広島・長崎
廃炉
東京電力
東日本大震災・福島原発
汚染水
米国
脱原発
被ばく
資本主義
避難
除染
食の安全
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.