Skip to main content

View Diary: Nuclear energy in France - a Sunday Special (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  yes, (none)
    It's fair to keep in perspective the certainty of climatic mayhem that coal plants provide, as opposed to the mere risk of stray neutrinos that nuclear plants pose. One problem is global and the other localised, one certain the other improbable. If I were forced to only choose between those two  i know which it would be.

    However, there are caveats. Firstly the whole nuclear chain is not carbon neutral to the remotest degree. Because uranium requires large mining operations to extract quite small amounts of metal, uranium has a very high 'embedded' emissions per gram before it even reaches the reactor.

    Secondly, as I understand it, uranium has the same problems of finity that oil and gas have. There's enough to go around at the moment but if the US did what France has done then the world might run out in short order.

    I believe that France has many 'fast breeder' reactors which produce a surplus of some fuel elements, but my understanding is that these still need to be blended with mined uranium to create a stable fuel.

    No panacea, in other words.

    I have a delay pedal and I'm not afraid to use it.

    by droneboy on Sun Apr 10, 2005 at 06:27:14 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (125)
  • Community (58)
  • 2016 (45)
  • Elections (37)
  • Environment (35)
  • Media (34)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (33)
  • Republicans (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (28)
  • Barack Obama (27)
  • Iraq (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Jeb Bush (24)
  • Culture (23)
  • Economy (20)
  • Labor (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (18)
  • Senate (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site