Coal ash is more radioactive than nuclear waste!
source: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste
-
-
- DeliaTheArtist
- added this
"Over the past few decades a series of studies has called stereotypes [about coal and nuclear energy] into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, fly ash—a by-product from burning coal for power—contains up to 100 times more radiation than nuclear waste...
...Developing countries like India and China continue to unveil new coal-fired plants—at the rate of one every seven to 10 days in the latter nation. And the U.S. still draws around half of its electricity from coal. But coal plants have an additional strike against them: they emit harmful greenhouse gases...
With the world now focused on addressing climate change, nuclear power is gaining favor in some circles. China aims to quadruple nuclear capacity to 40,000 megawatts by 2020, and the U.S. may build as many as 30 new reactors in the next several decades. But, although the risk of a nuclear core meltdown is very low, the impact of such an event creates a stigma around the noncarbon power source.
The question boils down to the accumulating impacts of daily incremental pollution from burning coal or the small risk but catastrophic consequences of even one nuclear meltdown. "I suspect we'll hear more about this rivalry," Finkelman says. "More coal will be mined in the future. And those ignorant of the issues, or those who have a vested interest in other forms of energy, may be tempted to raise these issues again."
ARE WE F*CKED OR WHAT?!?
Who's side are you on in the Coal VS Nuclear Rivalry? Shall I print up TEAM COAL and TEAM NUCLEAR shirts?
-
- groups:
- News and Politics, Politics, Green, Random, 3 more
-
- tags:
- News and Politics, Politics, Not News, Green, 15 more
-
-
csmonut
-
This is as appropriate now as it ever was. Especially since the people of Tennessee have such a nice big spill to worry about.
- 3 years ago
-
csmonut
-
-
onechance
-
Coal is clean... I eat is for breakfast.
My name is Dick Cheney.
- 3 years ago
-
onechance
-
-
Vierotchka
-
92 Miles Sq. of Solar Could Power the USA
The stigma of solar as only one of many solutions needed to satisfy our energy needs may not be true. David Mills, chairman and chief scientific officer of solar company Ausra, recently presented a paper at the International Solar Energy Society conference saying that solar thermal plants could indeed solve all of our energy problems, including nighttime electricity.
More at link.
- 3 years ago
-
Vierotchka
-
-
jubal
-
Iceland is doing Carbon Recycling and turning Carbon emissions into a fuel that can run automobiles.
- 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
jubal
-
Aren't we trying to stop carbon emissions into the atmosphere? If carbon recovery systems are made viable, then there would be a huge market to open up in recycling the carbon.
Just like steel recycling is surging right now and you can get a lot more the old jalopy of your hogging up the driveway or the garage. Instead of paying someone to haul it off, it is now worth quite a bit of money.
I have a friend who now has two tow trucks and picks up anywhere from 10 to 20 cars a week from people anxious to get rid of an old "not running" heap, and get paid a cool $100 for the thing. Then he takes them to the scrap yard and gets a check for $700 to $900 for the wreck at the steel recovery yard. Do the math and you will soon see what a lucrative business he has gotten going.
He has one person who just spends their day on Craigslist looking for cars and posting ads offering you $100 to get rid of that wreck in your garage or driveway.
I am using this as a metaphor on how carbon recycling can become a big boom.
- 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
PcfllIntent
-
Are you kidding me? maybe i should use some plutonium for grilling now
- 3 years ago
-
PcfllIntent
-
-
jubal
-
PcfllIntent:
Use Plutonium for grilling and you will loose your tongue, and you stomach, and your intestines, and it all come out below.
- 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
huntre
-
Maybe the better question is..."Shouldn't we be cutting back on our demands?"
- 3 years ago
-
huntre
-
-
futuregen
-
Ditch them both. Ray Kurzweil states we can get ALL THE WORLD"S ENERGY FROM SOLAR IN 5-14 YEARS: Nano-engineered solar panels. (Scroll down past the third commercial break).
- 3 years ago
-
futuregen
-
-
jjmaster
-
Neither are acceptable... we have the clean technologies now... Those are archaic and have proved to be hazardous pollutants! We just need to get beyond corporate and government interests and push for clean technologies... people are just signing up for business as usual... come on, let's move forward now... not 15 - 20 years from now...
- 3 years ago
-
jjmaster
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
jjmaster:
What clean energies do you think should be used to replace the current system?
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
ghobot
-
jjmaster:
why is nuclear energy unacceptable?
- 3 years ago
-
ghobot
-
-
jh64487
-
for more information on coal, Big Coal Industry, and preventing Mountain Top Removal, go to;
- 3 years ago
-
jh64487
-
-
mookster_07
-
We have the technology to be able to convert any carbon based material into energy. How about we begin converting our dead, our waste, etc. The decomposing human body is an extremely toxic thing. After we are buried 6 feet under we continue to damage our earth by emitting all of the hundreds of pollutants which remain in our body.
- 3 years ago
-
mookster_07
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
mookster_07:
I think that converting our dead into energy is controversial but something I've been saying and wondering about for a long time!
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
Dmitri_Molotov
-
mookster_07:
Go ahead, but I'm getting cryofrozen.
- 3 years ago
-
Dmitri_Molotov
-
-
jubal
-
mookster_07:
Yeah for cremation, where all the carbon is handed to you in an urn.
- 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
Bahlkris
-
*gulp*
I can see a coal factory from my house and they ban lead paint in my state.
- 3 years ago
-
Bahlkris
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
What about this? Current just ran a clip that said BIOMASS is the largest used form of renewable energy used in America, yet I rarely hear about it...sounds pretty good! Anyone have more info?
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
jahbini
-
DeliaTheArtist:
Our current foray into biomass is the ethanol we now add to gasoline. It comes from corn and diverts corn and land from food supply to energy. This has recently had the effect of helping cause food shortages around the globe.
Maybe with a few alterations to the system we can get ethanol to be more 'world friendly,' but right now, well... not so much.
Hemp, sugarcane, and others are possibilities, too. Hemp can be used for fiber too. That's good. Sugarcane stalks were always used here in Hawaii for energy production, up until the sugar subsidies went away.
- 3 years ago
-
jahbini
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
DeliaTheArtist:
thanks for the info, jahbini!
It seems like we could use BioMass with almost any organic material...doesn't that open up a ridiculous amount of things we could use for energy?
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
jahbini
-
DeliaTheArtist:
Can we do biomass without any escape of carbon dioxide? I'm personally more concerned with that end of the problem than mere availability.
Getting the carbon out of the atmosphere is getting more and more urgent. Even biomass seems like a break-even at best, and we are way, way beyond that threshold.
- 3 years ago
-
jahbini
-
-
jubal
-
DeliaTheArtist:
Pure alcohol when burned emits a water vapor. If we could produce a fuel from biomass that was basically pure alcohol, then we would have something really useful.
I believe that it is possible to create such a system of clean burning energy made from alcohol. Surely the biomass could be used in a fermentation process that could recover any carbon and recycle it into other useful things.
- 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
Dmitri_Molotov
-
I've been saying "go nuclear" all along here, but I still doubt the validity of the data.
- 3 years ago
-
Dmitri_Molotov
-
-
jahbini
-
Proponents may claim that the toxins are so diluted by the environment that there is no problem, however, from the article itself: "And when all food was grown in the area, radiation doses were 50 to 200 percent higher around the coal plants."
That means the food grown around the coal-plant concentrates the radiation! That is a problem as the toxins always concentrate in and impact the most vulnerable parts of a system: there is no protection by dilution.
I'm voting against coal in any form (except maybe in a steam engine in a railroad museum-- I love that.)
My list as of today - going from most preferred to least preferred (although some are not yet economical-which does NOT affect my personal preferences, although it may affect my day-to-day needs):
Wave
Ocean temp gradients- Air temp gradients
Wind
Solar
Geothermal
Nuclear
Petroleum
Ethanol
CoalSomeday I hope there are some new technologies to add to that list.
- 3 years ago
-
jahbini
-
-
jubal
-
jahbini:
Matter/Anti-Matter reactions
Zero Point Energy systems
Fusion power
Weak Magnetic Force Harnessing systems
Anti Gravity systems
Photon propulsion systems
Dark Matter Energy systems - 3 years ago
-
jubal
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
But can solar, wind, etc really replace the HUGE demand for energy and replace coal or nuclear? I'm not too sure about that!
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
jh64487
-
DeliaTheArtist:
no, the US must also reduce consumption. that's the tricky part.
- 3 years ago
-
jh64487
-
-
RudyRudell
-
go team nuclear! swords into ploughshares!
- 3 years ago
-
RudyRudell
-
-
phukna
-
i got my char-coal on, i'm making me some hamburger.
nuclear energy is cheaper,
they say that their's
more than one road that leads to rome.
i know that solar energy is not enough to provide for all our needs.
but really we have to think out side the bun.hamburger!!
- 3 years ago
-
phukna
-
-
Bigdog_mike
-
oh yeah and solar. Don't forget solar.
- 3 years ago
-
Bigdog_mike
-
-
Bigdog_mike
-
Wind and Water baby!
That's where the good stuff is at. - 3 years ago
-
Bigdog_mike
-
-
mookster_07
-
I will pick my t-shirt based on the colors you use. Honestly we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. Nuclear power has so many negative connotations, but coal isn't really an attractive alternative. We need to reduce our energy consumption in all forms in order to benefit anything.
- 3 years ago
-
mookster_07
-
-
Yhtomit
-
Well, coal causes acid rain, pollution and played a large part in global warming, and nuclear waste kills nearby life and can give you cancer. If you ask me, we should ditch 'em both.
- 3 years ago
-
Yhtomit
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
Yhtomit:
What are our alternatives for mass energy that could replace our current systems?
- 3 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
ghobot
-
Yhtomit:
like most technologies, the cons you state can be greatly minimized, unlike the ones associated with coal.
france has an electricity grid built on modern nuclear power, and it has not jeopardized its environment or increased cancer rates.
- 3 years ago
-
ghobot
-
-
huntre
-
Yhtomit:
Perhaps, we can cut down on our needs and concentrate on solar energy.
- 3 years ago
-
huntre
-
-
Vierotchka
-
Yhtomit:
"france has an electricity grid built on modern nuclear power, and it has not jeopardized its environment or increased cancer rates."
Not so.
01-06-1981: Accident at Le Hague reprocessing plant
01-20-1993: Technical failure at Paluel causes subcooling accident
01-28-1990: Pump failure during a shut-down at Gravelines nuclear power plant
04-01-1989: Control rod failure at Gravelines nuclear power plant
04-28-1988: Release of 5000 Curies of tritium gas from the Bruyere le Chatel military nuclear complex
05-26-1990: During refuelling, five cubic meters of radioactive water spilled at the Fessenheim nuclear power plant
06-1-1991: Failure of core cooling system at Belleville nuclear power plant
07-22-1992: Two workers contaminated at Dampierre nuclear power plant
07-26-1992: Temperature rise in storage pool at Gravelines nuclear power plant
08-19-1986: Flooding at the Cattenom nuclear power plant
08-28-1992: Fire in electro-generator at St.Alban nuclear power plant
09-16-1990: Superphenix Fast Breeder Reactor is closed down due to technical failures
09-22-1980: Pump failure causes accidental release of radioactive water at La Hague reprocessing plant
10-1-1983: Technical failure and human error cause accident at Blayas nuclear power plant
10-2-1968: Leakage at La Hague reprocessing plant
10-17-1969: Fuel elements melt at St Laurent des Eaux nuclear power plant
10-22-1993: Instrumentation and Control failure at Saint Alban nuclear power plant
11-07-1967: Release of radioactivity at Grenoble nuclear power plant
12-04-1990: 2 workers irradiated during refuelling at Blayais nuclear power plant
12-23-1988: Two control rods jammed at Blayais nuclear power plant
And just a few days ago, seventy five kilos of unenriched uranium seeped into the local water supply at the Tricastin plant run by Socatri, a subsidiary of French energy company Areva, leading to water bans http://www.nysun.com/foreign/france-uranium-leak-leads-to-water-bans/81453/
- 3 years ago
-
Vierotchka
-
-
ghobot
-
Yhtomit:
why are all of these at least 15 years ago?
i live near an old plant near new york city and its had problems since 1993. is this just not an update list?
this is also another good article. although it is not without danger, when you think of all cons with other traditional energy sources like oil and coal, there is a way to be safe with these substances.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html
- 3 years ago
-
ghobot
-
-
Vierotchka
-
Yhtomit:
Ghobot, your article conveniently omits the countless huge demonstrations in France against nuclear energy.
- 3 years ago
-
Vierotchka
