RE: National Geographic Peak Oil

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Fri May 21 2004 - 22:48:29 EDT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wallyshoes [mailto:wallyshoes@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 9:11 PM

> I really do not understand some the numbers that are tossed
> around here. According to the US DOE:
>
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/ipp/ipp99_sum.html

> The electricity in the United States is generated as follows:
>>

>Coal 43%
>Gas 19%
>Nuclear 15%
>Renewable 12%
>Petroleum 8%
>Pumped Hydroelectric 3%
>
>
>As can be seen, petroleum is only half of what nuclear generates. If
nuclear plants number 100, then it would take 50 of
>them total to replace the existing petroleum plants. That is one per
2%, not one per week.
>
>The problem is one of cars, not electrical power. In fact, nuclear
plants could also become that "hydrogen mine" that we
>need for automotive power.
>
>Chicken little is not dead yet.

Before you talk about chicken little you should understand that
electricity is not the only energy that Al was referring to. While I
don't presume to speak for him, I think he meant that we would have to
have all those nukes coming online to replace all the oil we use, not
just electricity. Here are the energy uses by fuel from the BP
Statistical Review of World Energy for 2002, just for the U.S. in
Million tonnes of oil equivalent.

 Oil Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Energy Hydroelectric
                                
 894.3 600.7 553.8 185.8 58.2

As you can see, there is 4.8 times more petroleum energy used than
Nuclear energy used in the US and if one adds natural gas, which is also
getting into short supply in the North American market with no relief
from LNG due to NIMBY, you have 8 times more energy in oil and natural
gas than is derived from nuclear energy. If we do have 100 nukes, then
the average output is 1.85 million tonnes per year per nuke. That means
that to replace oil we need 483 average nukes to be built to kick the
oil habit.

I ask again of those who think nuclear is the solution, how many nukes
are currently being planned for christening next decade? I think the
answer is zero.
Received on Fri May 21 22:48:37 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 21 2004 - 22:48:38 EDT