Power Generation and Carbon Emissions

Just a small point:

THE Hoover Dam is enormous, as you probably know. The tour guides have
ways of making its enormousness comprehensible. There’s enough concrete
in there, one told us, to lay a four-foot wide pavement all the way
around the equator. Another: there’s enough concrete in the dam to
concrete over the whole of Rhode Island. I wonder whether either of
these alternative projects was given proper consideration. Both have
their merits.

That’s a hell of a lot of concrete…and a lot of CO2 emissions.

In all the debates over power generation and carbon emissions, worth remembering that there is in fact no method of power generation that does not have carbon emissions. None, nada. Hydro is, as above, emittive because of the cement. In fact, as the chart here shows, hydro is more emittive than nuclear. And, err, biomass is twice as bad as either.

2 responses

  1. It’s very hard to turn into prose, convincingly, why this is worthwhile.
    I think he did fine just by describing it. The thing speaks for itself.

  2. Doc Bud Avatar
    Doc Bud

    All this is a redundant argument if anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are not causing significant global warming. As a cautious engineer/scientist, I won’t say they’re not, but I can say that there is no credible evidence (but one helluva lot of wishful thinking)to support the notion that they are. If we get rid of the carbon dioxide furphy, we can concentrate on properly evaluating the merits of each form of generation within a local context.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading