Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

But those numbers are essentially cherry-picked. They include just production of energy, like falling into the furnace? Consider about externalities. Mining, shipping. Then add in environmental erosion resulting in lower lifespans around the globe. Then failure/interruptions that endanger folks during cold snaps/heat waves. That's a big one - petrochemical plants can be down 30% of the time (nuclear < 2%) leaving grids endangered.

And of course its per-terawatt deaths that are interesting, not totals. Other wise you just have (literally) a heat map!




Mining and shipping is required for all forms of energy. Of course it's gonna be per twh because that is the only way to measure that makes any sense.

Kurzgesagt has a great video explaining everything here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzfpyo-q-RM


Mining and shipping are very, very different by source - every watt of coal is shipped. Only the machinery for solar is shipped. Nuclear fuel is shipped in pounds not megatons, but they are fantastically dangerous pounds. Etc. Utterly different in effect on risk.

The linked chart seemed to list totals. Did it have per TWHr? I missed that.


If you want to talkt about emissions instead here is a great summary from the Swedish Life cycle analysis by energy source: Nuclear: 6g CO2/kwh Hydro: 9g CO2/kwh Wind: 13g CO2/kwh Solar: 24g CO2/kwh

This includes everything from construction to mining. The data comes from Swedens state run energy company Vattenfall LCA report https://www.vattenfall.se/foretag/miljo/epd/ and here is a an article that summarizes it https://blog.karnfull.se/blog/kaernkraftslogik-1-klimatsmart




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: