Likewise if heat is indeed the main factor, nuclear power, though CO2 - free, can not be an alternative since total heat
emitted by nuclear power plants is more than twice the electrical output.
Not exact matches
The
nuclear hearts were
powered by plutonium - 238, an element that
emits close to a century's worth of steady heat due to its natural radioactive decay.
I believe that the sun is
powered by the
nuclear fusion of hydrogen in to helium, because the spectrum of the
emitted light is exactly as predicted
by theory and tested
by experiment on earth.
According to a study
by The Brattle Group, funded
by Exelon and other
nuclear supporters, the three reactors in Oswego County and another in Wayne County eliminate nearly 16 million tons of carbon dioxide a year that would otherwise be
emitted by fossil fuel
power plants.
The sentence marked with an asterisk was changed from «In fact, fly ash — a
by - product from burning coal for
power — and other coal waste contains up to 100 times more radiation than
nuclear waste» to «In fact, the fly ash
emitted by a
power plant — a
by - product from burning coal for electricity — carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a
nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.»
By comparison,
nuclear and wind
power are proven technologies that
emit no carbon and whose environmental risks and costs are thoroughly understood and which can make an immediate difference for the better.
The spent fuel produced
by nuclear power plants will
emit harmful radiation for hundreds of thousands — even millions — of years.
Neutrinos, or more specifically antineutrinos, are also
emitted as a
by - product of
power generation in manmade
nuclear reactors, giving scientists a powerful way to study them on Earth in a controlled manner.
How many gigatons of carbon is
emitted by preventing the opening of a generation of
nuclear power plants, I wonder.