Why Nukes are Cleaner than Oil. (Visually)

[Paratus]

Saw an interesting article in OT showing a cube of the yearly extracted amounts of 9 different mineral in relation to geographical areas. Year in Mining

Two of the minerals they show are the yearly production of Uranium and Crude Oil.

So in one year we extract a cube of Uranium 14.5m on a side vs Oil at 1714.5m on a side.

That's an enormous amount of oil compared to a small amount of Uranium. After being converted to energy the volume of waste for the Uranium will essentially be the same size as the cube of Uranium before use.

The oil of course will be combusted into a gas in most cases and combined with O2 so it's mass will increase by quite a bit and its volume will be enormous. (Of course not all oil is combusted a large portion will be processed into plastic or other petrochemical products.)

But maybe the reason there's so much oil is because the energy in that amount of oil dwarfs the energy contained in the Uranium.

Let's take a look.

Crude oil contains: 46MJ/kg
Uranium in a Light Water Reactor: 443,000 MJ/kg
Uranium in a Fast Breeder reactor: 86,000,000 MJ/kg

So in that amount of oil we have:
1.978x10^14 MJ

In the Uranium in a normal reactor we have:
2.755×10^13 MJ

In a fast breeder that's:
5.349x10^15 MJ

So depending on how the Uranium is used we get between 14% of energy in the oil or 27 times more for 1.6million times less waste by volume.

Next time someone tells you nuclear is dirty, you can respond by telling them it's over 1.6million times cleaner than fossil fuels and none of it goes into the air.

 

[MongGrel]

Well of course that was the original justification for them.

When they melt down now and then they are a bit worrisome though.

That and disposing of the waste.

 

[Paratus]

Well of course that was the original justification for them.

When they melt down now and then they are a bit worrisome though.

That and disposing of the waste.

Yes the waste is a problem but the point of this thread was to point out that the waste is actually very small and unlike combustion products, easliy trapped for storage.

Without the visual it's hard sometimes to realize the actually scope of the waste problem for both oil and nuclear.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

So how many oil fired power plants operate in the US?

 

[MongGrel]

Yes the waste is a problem but the point of this thread was to point out that the waste is actually very small and unlike combustion products, easliy trapped for storage.

Without the visual it's hard sometimes to realize the actually scope of the waste problem for both oil and nuclear.

I think the safety problem is the biggest issue there of course.

You are right, I'll agree would be much more efficient.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

So how many oil fired power plants operate in the US?

Last number I recall was around 110. Not all that capacity is utilized. Believe it's something like 3% of the total electrical generation.

 

[Genx87]

Well of course that was the original justification for them.

When they melt down now and then they are a bit worrisome though.

That and disposing of the waste.

If we lifted the ban on reprocessing. It should reduce our waste and storage requirements.

 

[glenn1]

OP is undeservedly treating the anti-nuke people like they are using rational and thoughtful reasoning rather than just emotional luddite sensationalism. You can't use a utilitarian argument to sway someone whose views are completely anti-utilitarian, the most you can hope for is after shutting down the nuclear generating plants they're allowed to enjoy their cold, dark houses and see if they change their minds.

 

[Paratus]

So how many oil fired power plants operate in the US?

I realize that oil is not used for much electrical generation, while nukes almost exclusively are. It ws mostly to point out the major difference in energy density and volume of waste. Also they didn't have a picture for coal.

Let me see if I can figure out the size of cube coal would need.

 

[BoberFett]

So how many oil fired power plants operate in the US?

So despite what we've been told, electricity ISN'T a replacement for fossil fuel vehicles?

 

[crashtech]

Funding for research on Gen IV reactors should be accelerated, imo. Risk factors can be even lower than they are today. Designs in use today are based on outdated reasoning and stem in part from the forceful vision of Adm. Rickover.

Many environmentalists who have rationally analyzed the risk see that Gen IV represents a bridge to a clean energy future.

 

[xaeniac]

the oil man sayeth this is propaganda

 

[crashtech]

I say bring all guns to bear, we need coal now but even those who acknowledge its necessity should admit that it's a nasty dirty way to keep the lights on. I think technologically we are better than burning dirty rocks at this point.

 

[Paratus]

So for the 7822.8 million tonnes of coal produced in 2013 @ 900kg/m^3 average thats a stack:

8.692 cubic kilometers

Or
2056m
On a side. So a bit bigger cube than the oil one.

Coal has an average 30MJ/kg depending on type.

So that's about 2.347x10^14 MJ. Basically the same as the oil calculations.

 

[rcpratt]

Nuclear might have a chance if/when Reid loses his majority seat and we can finally get going on Yucca.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Obligatory link to nuclear power plant incidents; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents

I am all for better energy sources, but, the Nuclear "Boogerman" has everyone in a choke hold.

 

[z1ggy]

People are just scared of nuclear power because of it's risk of melt down. From what I understand, the major incidents in world history were mainly at plants where user error or just plain old outdated/old facilities were in use.

With modern technology and a highly professional and trained staff, I don't see how anything would go wrong. We've had nuclear power on Submarines and other Navy vessels for decades, amounting to hundreds of ships, and not one reactor has melted down and caused the catastrophic damage people are so afraid of.

 

[Triumph]

Oil goes towards petroleum products. Nuclear develops electricity. It isn't a fair comparison because they aren't producing the same thing. You should be comparing nuclear to coal.

 

[Paratus]

So for the 7822.8 million tonnes of coal produced in 2013 @ 900kg/m^3 average thats a stack:

8.692 cubic kilometers

Or
2056m
On a side. So a bit bigger cube than the oil one.

Coal has an average 30MJ/kg depending on type.

So that's about 2.347x10^14 MJ. Basically the same as the oil calculations.

Oil goes towards petroleum products. Nuclear develops electricity. It isn't a fair comparison because they aren't producing the same thing. You should be comparing nuclear to coal.

Good idea.

 

[Anarchist420]

"Clean" is totally subjective; some people don't like cleanliness whatever that is. I mean, I like O negative blood from individuals with mtDNA hg U/U8bK; that is what turns me on the most. But psychiatrists like me turned off if they can't make money. Yet some still have the self-control to ignore me or avoid me. Maybe one will kill me. And others suffer pollution from the mtDNA I exhale (that's what I hate myself for the most).

Does all that explain why it is not bad for society if I stay in my parents' home typing for as long as I can?

 

[Bitek]

Yes the waste is a problem but the point of this thread was to point out that the waste is actually very small and unlike combustion products, easliy trapped for storage.

Without the visual it's hard sometimes to realize the actually scope of the waste problem for both oil and nuclear.

I'm actually shocked the uranium cube is that big. Was expecting a magnitude smaller.

 

[z1ggy]

"Clean" is totally subjective; some people don't like cleanliness whatever that is. I mean, I like O negative blood from individuals with mtDNA hg U/U8bK; that is what turns me on the most. But psychiatrists like me turned off if they can't make money. Yet some still have the self-control to ignore me or avoid me. Maybe one will kill me. And others suffer pollution from the mtDNA I exhale (that's what I hate myself for the most).

Does all that explain why it is not bad for society if I stay in my parents' home typing for as long as I can?

Why does everything have to be about you bro? Think about all the little kiddies out there for a change.

 

[Paratus]

I'm actually shocked the uranium cube is that big. Was expecting a magnitude smaller.

Well if we were running it through a fast breeder it would ~200 times smaller.

 

[Texashiker]

Why Nukes are Cleaner than Oil. (Visually)

Where are pictures of Chernobyl?

 

[IronWing]

I posted the original link on OT. If the discussion is how "clean" a fuel is then I think a more informative graphic would be a bigger block showing the total footprint of various fuels. Oil requires a huge infrastructure plus brine, sulfur, and refinery wastes and emmissions. Coal requires a huge infrastructure plus mine wastes, fly ash, emmissions, and dead miners. Uranium requires huge infrastructure, mine wastes, mill wastes, enrichment tails, high level, low level wastes. Getting to the cubes in the pics requires bigger cubes. Nothing is free.