John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.


Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.

Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.


The actual tonnage of refined is aroudn 50 tins a year I think.

The raw ore is around 100 times more so 5k tonnes of e.g. yellowcake.

Complicated by fast breeders and recycling of spent rods. Both of which
reduce fuel consumption.