Sentences with phrase «than nuclear power»

Wind energy creates 30 % more jobs than a coal plant and 66 % more than a nuclear power plant per unit of energy generated.

I am 55 and I expect that within my lifetime, wind and solar will be generating a larger share of the world's electricity than nuclear power does today — perhaps much larger.

Other than nuclear power, there is now no feasible large scale potential source of energy.

But despite the market's not yet recognizing the benefits, the decentralized low - or no - carbon generators turn out to be greater in capacity and output than nuclear power worldwide.

The least - cost solar option would require 400 times more land area and emit 20 times more CO2 than nuclear power.

Some would argue that natural gas has a lower carbon footprint than nuclear power if an objective comparison is made over the full product life cycle.

«It doesn't have to be cheaper than a nuclear power plant built in 1965, it just has to be cheaper than the next kilowatt - hour the utility needs at 4 pm on a hot, July afternoon.

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.»

If the purpose of hyping AGW was to get more nuclear power, it backfired spectacularly, because the low gas prices and double - digit interest rates of the time caused electricity companies to stampede into gas - fired power stations (cheap to build but expensive to run) rather than nuclear power stations (expensive to build but cheap to run).

During March and April, all renewable energy sources together generated more electricity than nuclear power in the nation for the first time since 1984.

Per dollar invested, energy efficiency delivers seven times more emissions reductions than nuclear power does, according to the Rocky Mountain Institute.

This devastating outlier pushes the statistical risk of dams dozens of times higher, to 54.7 deaths per 10 TWh — about 46 times more risk than nuclear power.

The MP for Wealden responded: «I think frankly you will find different views among colleagues - colleagues are more divided on onshore wind than nuclear power.»

Fusion power is a much safer alternative than nuclear power, which is based on the splitting (fission) of heavy atoms.

We are pleased to reprint the summary of a very recent important analysis by Amory Lovins regarding why nuclear power remains unaffordable and why alternatives are actually being used now and are faster growing energy sources than nuclear power.

We also discuss what's going on in New Mexico with renewable energy, work that offers a better response to meeting people's energy needs and also is better environmentally and more affordable than nuclear power — or coal, oil, and natural gas that also play major roles in New Mexico.

When I offered the job to Mark, a former Breakthrough Generation Fellow, last summer, I told him that if he ever discovered that solar and batteries were cheaper, cleaner or otherwise better than nuclear power, he had to tell me at once, or I would fire him.

The latest issue of the U.S. Energy Information's «Electric Power Monthly» (with data through April 30) reveals that — for the first time since the beginning of the nuclear era — renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar — inc. small - scale PV, wind) are now providing a greater share of the nation's electrical generation than nuclear power.

On every measure (climate change, mining impact, local pollution, industrial injury and death, even radioactive discharges) coal is 100 times worse than nuclear power (10,11).

Germany, for example, is a country that is not particularly warm or sunny, but is nevertheless the world leader in solar energy, generating more electricity with solar than nuclear power in July 2015.

Renewables also require far more land and materials than nuclear power.

It is noteworthy that, even with the presence of poorly designed nuclear power plants in the past, and in some cases demonstrably sloppy operations, the waste from coal - fired power plants has done far more damage, and even spread more radioactive material around the world than all nuclear power plants combined, including Chernobyl.

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.

Anyone still banging on about CO2 emissions in the electricity generation sector, ought to be banging on about nothing other than nuclear power.

In contrast, in New Mexico and many other states, government is supporting renewable energy, which is being used in rapidly increasing amounts by many citizens as the new path to the future, rather than nuclear power.

Renewable energy sources - such as hydropower, biomass, solar, wind and geothermal power - already provide the United States with more energy than nuclear power.

In 2012, wind farms generated 2 percent more electricity than nuclear power plants did, a gap that will likely widen dramatically over the next few years as wind surges ahead.

-- Most of the reviewed scenarios estimate that renewables will contribute more to a low carbon energy supply by 2050 than nuclear power or fossil fuels using carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Nuclear defenders are calling for keeping things in perspective — fossil fuels, they point out, have many more costs and risks associated with them than nuclear power; and newer generation reactor designs are far safer than those built in Japan many decades ago (a number of US plants from the same era have the same or similar designs).

The capital cost would be 20 times more than nuclear power.

Greg Dalton: Michael Shellenberger, coal - fired electricity damages public health far more than nuclear power?

«Comparisons of wind, solar, nuclear, natural gas and coal sources of power coming on line by 2015 show that solar power will be 173 % more expensive per unit of energy delivered than traditional coal power, 140 % more than nuclear power and natural gas and 92 % more expensive than wind power.

A US Senate report notes, «Comparisons of wind, solar, nuclear, natural gas and coal sources of power coming on line by 2015 show that solar power will be 173 % more expensive per unit of energy delivered than traditional coal power, 140 % more than nuclear power and natural gas and 92 % more expensive than wind power.

The integrated energy strategy offered by Charcoal based Terra Preta Soil technology may provide the only path to sustain our agricultural and fossil fueled power structure without climate degradation, other than nuclear power.

But the dramatically dropping costs of offshore wind, which is now cheaper than nuclear power and closing in on parity with fossil fuels in Europe, have sparked an explosion of renewed interest in the US.