Skip to main content

View Diary: Hansen: Nuclear power has prevented 1.8 million deaths (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I just know what I read in scientific papers. (0+ / 0-)

    I know...I know...

    Trade trumps science every time.   It's the reason why a country can actually make its energy policies more disastrous - as Germany did - and still get wild eyed cheering.

    The hatred and disregard for science in modern culture is a big part of the reason that there is no hope whatsoever where environmental issues are concerned.

    Have a nice evening.

    •  The trades have the current news (0+ / 0-)

      it takes a year or two to get anything published in a journal, and most of the journal papers are some minor facet, the broad sweep is in the trades.

      You were referring to what went on in 2011, which is so old news, the interesting story is what went on in 2012.

      Renewables have passed hard coal and nuclear in germany, and is about 18 months away from passing soft coals.

      I don't know why that bothers you so much.

      •  Not really. (0+ / 0-)

        I've been at this for years.

        For more than 2 decades I've been hearing that what I report is "old news."

        The problem is that when the bullshit filters into the analytical literature, what happens is that the bullshit is found to be exactly that, bullshit.

        The "trades" are simply very sloppy pieces of unreviewed crap put out by journalists.

        "Passing nuclear" is pretty easy in that coal, oil and gas hellhole in Germany since they shut their nuclear plants in a paroxysm of fear and ignorance.

        I pointed out that they reduced their overall climate change gas free energy capacity.

        If I become richer than Warren Buffet, because Warren Buffet loses all his money, I cannot claim that I am suddenly wealthy.

        Finally, wind and solar will never have external costs as low as nuclear, as is evidenced in just about every "life cycle analysis" paper one reads.

        If one reads about their externalities, they are not particularly clean, a point that is overlooked precisely because after 50 years of cheering and sucking up ridiculous amounts of money on a planet where two billion people have never seen or operated a toilet bowl, they remain trivial forms of energy.   Between them they do not provide even 2 exajoules of the 520 exajoules of energy that humanity now consumes.

        I note that the Germans have used what I called the "California solution" for pretending to have abandoned coal, which is to import coal fired power from Eastern Europe.

        And of course, there's the issue of dangerous natural gas, which - and this applies in Germany's case - is an approach to climate change that is announcing that one is no longer an alcoholic because one has now switched from scotch to wine and beer.   Wine and beer destroy one's liver, and gas destroys one's atmosphere - and in the case of fracked gas - water as well.

        For one example:  Assessment of Effluent Contaminants from Three Facilities Discharging Marcellus Shale Wastewater to Surface Waters in Pennsylvania

        It bothers me because I read science journals.  I favor the phase out of all dangerous fossil fuels, and so called "renewable" energy which is no such thing is not a way of phasing out these disasters, but is rather a way to entrench them.

        The solar and wind industries would collapse in a New York minute without access to gas, and as such are not sustainable and never will be sustainable.  

        Germany, in particular, disgusts me, particularly as I closely watch the planetary atmosphere die, and it is dying, at a rapidly accelerating pace.

        I am sick to death from the rote and mindless praise of the huge environmental disaster that the horrid exercise in fear and ignorance that that country's energy policies represent.

        To me it's rather the equivalent, although probably at a much greater human impact, of the announcement that increased devotion to prayer was the ultimate solution to bubonic plague.

        I wrote 399 diaries in this space on energy and the environment in this awful space explaining why and how I came to feel this way, and I note that the evidence can be traced in them how I changed my mind on solar and wind, and came to the conclusion that they were in themselves, disasters.

        This month, by the way, a paper was published suggesting that the entire solar energy industry was been a net consumer rather than a producer of electricity up until as late as 2010.

        Energy Balance of the Global Photovoltaic (PV) Industry - Is the PV Industry a Net Electricity Producer?

        This is not a question that the "trades" are equipped to address, since the "trades" are not particularly scientifically literate, relying in general, on reporters who have no scientific training whatsoever.

        Have a nice day today.

        •  if PV were so bad (0+ / 0-)

          they would cost a lot more.

          that the prices are dropping so fast for both PV and Wind, indicates things are changing.

          as for these studies that Life-cycle this or that, i'm
          much more interested in the price points.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site