Earl Brunner on tue 18 dec 07
Maybe, but we sure have come up with some good ideas on what to do with all of that nuclear contaminated materials or byproducts from the nuclear industry......
(sarcasm if you didn't pick up on it)
And sticking it in my back yard isn't the answer.
You are saying I think, that when you add up all of the carbon costs for making the solar cells, it's not such a good deal? Carbon seems to be the big consideration as we look at global warming, but it's not the only consideration. I think it's stupid how some of our municipalities make a big deal about using biofuel as if it's the "BIG" answer. When you factor in all of the costs of growing the stuff and converting it to fuel, it's not so good either.
Earl Brunner
Las Vegas, NV
----- Original Message ----
From: John Sankey
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 6:07:36 AM
Subject: Re: ER(electric reduction)
"Nuclear is the dirtiest fuel, solar very clean."
As one who has studied the life cycle carbon costs of electricity
a fair bit, I can't let this go by. It's the other way around
when you add up all the carbon costs of building, maintaining,
and decommissioning the system as well as the output.
See http://sankey.ws/carbonbudget for some numbers.
--
Include 'Byrd' in the subject line of your reply
to get through my spam filter.
| |
|
