3 ms·

Electric cars don't reduce pollution They most certainly do. Even the latest, most wonderfully advanced gasoline engines are positively filthy compared to a m

Electric cars don't reduce pollution They most certainly do. Even the latest, most wonderfully advanced gasoline engines are positively filthy compared to a modern coal plant, which is positive filthy compared to a nuclear plant, which is positively filthy compared to a solar/wind/wave plant.

ars 15y ago
You have that last one backwards, nuclear is cleaner than solar/wind/wave, because you are forgetting just how much land those need.
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  How does land use have anything to do with pollution?
  - ars 15y ago
    Because you have to construct them, and it takes a ton of energy to do so. The construction process also produces a lot of waste.
    - easp 15y ago
      You aren't taking into consideration the vast amounts of concrete and steel that go into a nuclear plant, nor the mining and refining of the uranium, nor, for that matter, it's disposal. Further, I think you are overestimating the impact of building and deploying wind turbines. They may require a lot of land, but their physical footprint is pretty small, and most of the land around them can be used for other purposes, like agriculture.
      - ars 15y ago
        I am taking those into consideration. A nuclear plant produces a tremendous amount of energy for the materials it's made from. I was doing the math, and this document popped up as a search: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:UjtsvTfrOgQJ:www.ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/wind-concrete-steel-07.doc+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShS9RRktG_eNeqbnoTZa_JCkPBNZdqboYOE6i7beemDjgYK4GJc5ZryJJ8i4MxfiO2YK7R87bOBIySvVayW7VC2GcwnxUWIM4zVwVP7LPYJ6blgXqoGy4Ub8FUQv_pkbIdPcYnp&sig=AHIEtbSQTCLuYOK3u4CG37_QbqZXH6EdLw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:UjtsvTfrOgQJ:... So they did the math for me - wind turbines require 60 times as many resources as nuclear. The amount of uranium needed is tiny, very very tiny. And all the uranium ever made can be disposed of in one site, it's not really a lot. They also require far far more land. I don't just mean how much air space, but the actual tower. Wind turbines are better than coal, and since we are building lots of coal plants I am all for wind. But they are not better than nuclear - not even close.

ars 15y ago

You have that last one backwards, nuclear is cleaner than solar/wind/wave, because you are forgetting just how much land those need.

georgieporgie 15y ago
How does land use have anything to do with pollution?
- ars 15y ago
  Because you have to construct them, and it takes a ton of energy to do so. The construction process also produces a lot of waste.
  - easp 15y ago
    You aren't taking into consideration the vast amounts of concrete and steel that go into a nuclear plant, nor the mining and refining of the uranium, nor, for that matter, it's disposal. Further, I think you are overestimating the impact of building and deploying wind turbines. They may require a lot of land, but their physical footprint is pretty small, and most of the land around them can be used for other purposes, like agriculture.
    - ars 15y ago
      I am taking those into consideration. A nuclear plant produces a tremendous amount of energy for the materials it's made from. I was doing the math, and this document popped up as a search: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:UjtsvTfrOgQJ:www.ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/wind-concrete-steel-07.doc+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShS9RRktG_eNeqbnoTZa_JCkPBNZdqboYOE6i7beemDjgYK4GJc5ZryJJ8i4MxfiO2YK7R87bOBIySvVayW7VC2GcwnxUWIM4zVwVP7LPYJ6blgXqoGy4Ub8FUQv_pkbIdPcYnp&sig=AHIEtbSQTCLuYOK3u4CG37_QbqZXH6EdLw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:UjtsvTfrOgQJ:... So they did the math for me - wind turbines require 60 times as many resources as nuclear. The amount of uranium needed is tiny, very very tiny. And all the uranium ever made can be disposed of in one site, it's not really a lot. They also require far far more land. I don't just mean how much air space, but the actual tower. Wind turbines are better than coal, and since we are building lots of coal plants I am all for wind. But they are not better than nuclear - not even close.