Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: teevee who wrote (36581)	12/13/2012 1:23:33 PM
From: Land Shark	1 Recommendation Respond to of 86356

Link or lie

To: teevee who wrote (36581)	12/13/2012 1:48:06 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

This is true. That's why California doesn't count big hydro as part of the renewable portfolio requirements for utilities. It's also another opportunity to close some loops. Scientists in Brazil have claimed that a major source of greenhouse gas emissions could be curbed by capturing and burning methane given off by large hydro-electric dams. more nuclear power is a good part of solution to green power" news.bbc.co.uk news.softpedia.com "more nuclear power is a good part of solution to green power." Only if you ignore life-cycle CO2 production (and Fukashima and the waste). Then it becomes part of the problem. A meta analysis of 103 life-cycle studies by Benjamin K. Sovacool found that nuclear power plants produce electricity with a mean of 66 g equivalent life-cycle carbon dioxide emissions per kWh, compared to renewable power generators, which produce electricity with 9.5 to 38 g carbon dioxide per kWh and fossil fueled power plants, which produce electricity with about 443 to 1,050 g equivalent lifecycle carbon dioxide emissions per kWh. [1] [2] [3] en.wikipedia.org