Priligy online now, save money

MAY 27

Recent Comment

" The Japanese would no doubt would disagree with the efficiency claims..."

View all Comments

Life-Cycle Analysis Shows Renewables Produce Only 5% of the Emissions of Coal

The 'fuel' used to generate power from the sun or the generic viagra no rx usa wind is, of course, emissions free. But we realize that it is necessary to how to get levitra online look at more than just the fuel input in evaluating the total impacts of various technologies. Life-cycle analysis (LCA) goes beyond the operational comparison and only now viagra dosage also looks at the impacts of creating the equipment to harness those energies as well as the effects of decomissioning them at their end of life.

Research by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has looked at a wide range of studies carried out to asess the greenhouse gas effects related to different forms of energy. THe NREL meta-study sought to equalize and balance the different studies carried out by different researchers in such a fashion that they could be compared with each other.

The conclusions show that "greenhouse-gas emissions from wind power and solar photovoltaics are about 5% of those from coal and that nuclear energy emissions are on par with those from renewable energy."

Renewables such as solar and wind produce far fewer greenhouse-gas emissions than coal, oil or natural gas while in operation. But the meta-analysis looked even deeper, at emissions estimates starting with the manufacture of solar panels, wind turbines, coal plants or natural-gas lines, all the way to the emissions estimates for decommissioning the sites.

While it may seem intuitively obvious, the ability to cross-compare between different studies has not been there previously, and this will allow for better comparison between different techologies, as well as giving a more even picture of the benefits of renewable energy.

via: NA Windpower

Hits: 14073
Comments (5)Add Comment
written by Lisa Simpson, May 27, 2012
5% sounds high--maybe not for solar because of the energy required to melt silicon, but definitely for wind. And I don't understand how nuclear isn't higher, with the uranium mining, processing, and transport required, not to mention the buy generic no online prescription viagra massive amounts of concrete used during construction and decommission.
Not a good comparison, Low-rated comment [Show]
A stitch just in time...saves at least nine.
written by Aja, May 30, 2012

Wouldn't you rather efficiency over a quick fix?

(rant/ramble warning)

I live in a part of Australia where uranium mining is a big thing. There's even a mine inside our most famous, heritage-listed Kakadu National Park! The last weeks and months have seen a big increase in local interest on uranium and it's by-products, with public discussions and media coverage. A town took to the streets with their local indigenous elders to protest against the forced placement of a nuclear waste storage facility. This area, Muckaty Station, is in a seismic zone and flood-prone, 100s of Ks from anywhere. Transport, worker safety and the rise in less predictable weather... I'm sure you are smart enough to figure out where this is going.

In the past decade I've seen tropical woodlands exchanged for new suburbs; marine life drastically decline because of treated sewerage being released incorrectly and then rerouted 2km down the coast and rereleased incorrectly. Drink manufacturers are refusing to pay their share on click here discount generic cialis online the dying recycle depots... and our town got a gas processing plant that didn't finish writing It's environmental policy so just hope nothing goes wrong since it's built close to click here order levitra from canada dugong, dolphin & fish feeding grounds, dive sites and WWII tourist attractions...

Listen, it's worth investing in renewables over the others and cheapest cialis there are life and environmental costs that aren't usually considered by those further from the issue.

I'm part of a campaign by the Australian Youth Climate Coalition (AYCC) called Repower Australia.

Yeh we have the petition, donation drives and all that but we are also getting together with our hangouts - a favourite pub, theatre, festival, grocery or whatever you please and holding events to fundraise and aware-ness...raise... about switching to the smarter solutions. It's all followed through on so far with hundreds of events and tens of cialis india pharmacy thousands of dollars raised, confirmed by us making sure that our leaders are aware of what we are doing without them.

I'm almost done. You might not know what they have done so far - a "clean energy futures package" where my favourite part is the best price for generic viagra $10b renewable energy fund.

While the Australian government has said that $10b will go to clean energy, not all of it is planned to go to renewables. Instead, up to half the money could go to fossil fuels like nuclear – these are false solutions to climate change that create huge amounts of greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, polluters are lobbying the CEFC, so we are offering our vision for how the money could be better spent. The entire package already has a handout to cialis australia help polluters become more efficient and then there's the carbon price/tax/Emissions Trading part of the deal...

So... that's where I'm coming from and I hope this is still a decent discussion that I've contributed to with part of my story.

Enough sun falls on our planet in less than a day for enough power if we got well into solar thermal power plants which can do drug levitra way more than baseload consumption needs. Enough sun falls on Australia that we could use only photovoltaics in a 100km-squared area for our national power... just... Isn’t it obvious now?

Gorram invest in renewable energy already! Rrr!
Doing Without Base Load Generating Capacity
written by Ronald Brak, May 31, 2012
Aja, you may already know that South Australia will shut down its base load generating capacity in July and the state will do without base load plants from then. This has mostly been due to build out of wind power, point of use solar PV has also helped.
written by Jerry, May 31, 2012
The Japanese would no doubt would disagree with the efficiency claims for nuclear power, it is neither efficient, cost effective nor safe!

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?

The Most Popular Articles