4 ms·
Not really: nuclear only impacts electricity production, which only covers 25% of greenhouse emissions in the US [1]. So even if that went to zero, it would be
by SavantIdiot 5y ago
Not really: nuclear only impacts electricity production, which only covers 25% of greenhouse emissions in the US [1]. So even if that went to zero, it would be a huge help, but there's still 3/4 more to improve on.
[1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...
- jjoonathan 5y ago100% is too optimistic, yes. 25% is too pessimistic, though. If you have universal nuclear power, EVs don't ever have to charge from coal plants, so you've got a direct path to attacking the transportation 25%. Gas heating and cooking have electric alternatives, so you have a direct path to attacking that 25%. As for industry, I suspect a very decent fraction of its 25% consumes energy (and, therefore, could be readily substituted for electric) rather than hydrocarbons. In any case, the many gigatons of CO2 we put into the atmosphere by killing nuclear are completely indefensible.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago> In any case, the many gigatons of CO2 we put into the atmosphere by killing nuclear are completely indefensible. I cannot defend that. Big Oil is tough competitor.