Ronald Baileylta:
New Study: Nuclear Power Is Humanity's Greenest Energy OptionTämä oli tutkimuksessa vihdoin huomattu:
Land-hungry biomass, wind, and solar power are set to occupy an area equivalent of the size of the European Union by 2050.
[..]
The Scientific Reports study finds that implementing the IEA's roadmap requires that much of the world's agricultural and wild lands be sacrificed to produce energy. Biofuels, both liquid and solid, are especially egregious destroyers of the landscape. On the other hand, the energy source that spares the most land is nuclear power. In addition, electricity produced by fission reactors is not intermittent the way that vastly more land-hungry solar and wind power are.
Let's go to the figures. The European researchers illustrated the vast differences in the amount of energy that can be produced per unit of land by calculating what percentage of land would be needed to meet 100 percent of emissions-free primary energy demand in 2050. Primary energy refers to raw fuels before they have been converted into other forms of energy like electricity, heat, or transport fuels. They calculate that nuclear power generation could supply all the energy demand in 2050 while occupying just 0.016 percent of the world's land area. On the other hand, using biomass to generate the same amount of energy would take up more than 96 percent of the world's land area.
Viitaten vaikka edelliseen: oikeastaan Luxemburgin pitäisi maksaa sakonomaisia korvauksia Suomelle, jos sen
suunnittelema hanke toteutetaan.
On asia ennen tuota tutkimustakin huomattu:
Kertoopa Hesari asian tästä puolestakin:
Taistelu tuulimyllyjä vastaan
Suomen tuulivoiman määrä on lähivuosina kaksinkertaistumassa, jotta ilmasto säästyisi ja Suomi pääsisi irti venäläisestä energiasta. Kainuun metsistä nousee kuitenkin huoli: unohtuuko samalla luonto?
Mutta onpahan nyt tuon tutkimuksen avulla kunnon vertailulukuja:
Over at Tech Xplore, study co-author and energy conversion researcher at Norwegian University of Science and Technology Jonas Kristiansen Nøland points out that "the spatial extent of nuclear power is 99.7% less than onshore wind power—in other words, 350 times less use of land area." He adds, "An energy transition based on nuclear power alone would save 99.75% of environmental encroachments in 2050. We could even remove most of the current environmental footprint we have already caused."
Nuclear power massively spares land for nature while producing 24-7 emissions-free electricity. That's why closing down 17 perfectly good nuclear power plants is environmentally stupid.
Yhdessäkään Suomen kunnassa ei pitäisi olla tyhmänylpeitä kunnan "vihreästä siirtymästä", jos suositaan ja edistetään tuuli- ja aurinkovoimaa
kunnan alueella.
