View Single Post
Old 07-10-2010, 02:54 PM   #17 (permalink)
jamesqf
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
The nuclear power plant requires a lot of energy during decommissioning, too, don't forget. And storage/security for the spent fuel, and low level radiation materials, too.
Maybe. But "requires" can be a pretty slippery word, as for instance all those people who think a car "requires" a couple tons of steel and a big V8 :-)

Just to provoke thought, a large part of the carbon-cost of a nuclear plant is the concrete containment structure. Now if you've ever poked around Europe much, you'll run into a number of concrete structures that are still servicable - and being used - 1500-2000 years after they were built. See for instance the concrete dome of the Pantheon in Rome. So after investing all the time & materials needed to build a massive concrete structure, why "decommission" it a few decades later?
  Reply With Quote