3 ms·
These unpublished German numbers seem way off, you usually measure CO2eq and not CO2 maybe that explains it? CO2eq takes "all" greenhouse gas polution into acco
by cinntaile 5y ago
These unpublished German numbers seem way off, you usually measure CO2eq and not CO2 maybe that explains it? CO2eq takes "all" greenhouse gas polution into account. It's not Germany, but here is some data for nuclear energy from Vattenfall (the operator) in Sweden. [0]
The LCA assessment is done according to the ISO 14025 standard. It's about 3g CO2eq per kWh. From the PDF: "The whole lifecycle of nuclear power has been inventoried hence the full path from mining of natural uranium through production of uranium fuel and generation of electricity at the nuclear power plant to final repository of the spent fuel is included "
[0] https://www.environdec.com/library/epd923 https://www.environdec.com/library/epd923
On second thought gCO2/kWh instead of gCO2eq/kWh can't be the explanation since gCO2eq=gCO2+the other gases equivalent.
- masonic 5y ago>"The whole lifecycle of nuclear power has been inventoried... But if they didn't do the same for solar panels (materials mining, manufacture, manufacturing infrastructure, transportation and installation, decommissioning, etc.), it's a horrendously biased concept. Also, determining a lifecycle of a nuclear plant is a crapshoot. Modern designs that can be replicated at scale will have much more production per unit of deployment cost than the one-off botch designs like those implemented in California by PGE and SMUD.
- cinntaile 5y agoTheir CO2eq are all calculated according to the same ISO standard, but they don't have solar so the numbers only exist for hydro, wind and nuclear.