Wednesday, July 18, 2012
A useful article on Forbes "lists the mortality rate of each energy source as deaths per trillion kWhrs produced. The numbers are a combination of actual direct deaths and epidemiological estimates, and are rounded to two significant figures."
Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal – global average 170,000 (50% global electricity)
Coal – China 280,000 (75% China’s electricity)
Coal – U.S. 15,000 (44% U.S. electricity)
Oil 36,000 (36% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas 4,000 (20% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop) 440 (< 1% global electricity)
Wind 150 (~ 1% global electricity)
Hydro – global average 1,400 (15% global electricity)
Nuclear – global average 90 (17% global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)
So nuclear is conclusively the safest.
However that is the "epidemiological" number of nuclear deaths, which means they are using the LNT theory of radiation damage. However that is indisputably evidence free and thus nonsense. In fact there was a conclusive figure for the beneficial effect of hormesis it would almost certainly turn out that the number of deaths was negative.
However if we simply ignore LNT effects total deaths over the last generation total under 60 (51 for Chernobyl, 2 in an accident in Japan & zero at Fukushima).
Nuclear electricity has amounted to about 20,000TWh average over the last 25 years. so that gives us 500TWh.
So that should read:
Nuclear - Global average 0.2
Is there any significant industry in human history that has been remotely as safe as that?
Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal – global average 170,000 (50% global electricity)
Coal – China 280,000 (75% China’s electricity)
Coal – U.S. 15,000 (44% U.S. electricity)
Oil 36,000 (36% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas 4,000 (20% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop) 440 (< 1% global electricity)
Wind 150 (~ 1% global electricity)
Hydro – global average 1,400 (15% global electricity)
Nuclear – global average 90 (17% global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)
So nuclear is conclusively the safest.
However that is the "epidemiological" number of nuclear deaths, which means they are using the LNT theory of radiation damage. However that is indisputably evidence free and thus nonsense. In fact there was a conclusive figure for the beneficial effect of hormesis it would almost certainly turn out that the number of deaths was negative.
However if we simply ignore LNT effects total deaths over the last generation total under 60 (51 for Chernobyl, 2 in an accident in Japan & zero at Fukushima).
Nuclear electricity has amounted to about 20,000TWh average over the last 25 years. so that gives us 500TWh.
So that should read:
Nuclear - Global average 0.2
Is there any significant industry in human history that has been remotely as safe as that?
Labels: eco-fascism, Fear, nuclear
