That has done little to assuage the fears of local residents, however, who say the utility company should have notified the public earlier about the leak.Īs Minnesota joins a growing number of states with ambitious clean-energy goals – it recently passed legislation to go 100% carbon-free on electricity by 2040 – more climate advocates and politicians are saying they cannot get there with traditional renewables alone. Xcel Energy powered down its Monticello plant in mid-March for maintenance, once the second leak had been discovered. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Department of Health say the risks to the public from the leaks of water contaminated with tritium – totaling a little more than 400,000 gallons – are minimal and have not affected public drinking water. “As we’re looking at how you build a low- or zero-carbon economy, nuclear seems like an essential tool,” says Kevin Pranis of the Minnesota and North Dakota branch of Laborers’ International Union of North America, which represents over 12,000 workers. One bipartisan bill here would fund research into the use of advanced nuclear reactor designs. reactor fleet is of a similar generation to the one involved in Japan’s Fukushima disaster.īut as more states adopt ambitious clean-energy goals – Minnesota’s is to be 100% carbon-free on electricity by 2040 – many leaders say they can’t get there without nuclear power as part of the solution. With the exception of one next-generation plant in Georgia, the U.S. “I’ll definitely be fishing upstream this year,” says Chuck, a resident whose father worked at the plant.īuilding public trust is a key challenge for advocates of nuclear energy here and across the nation.
Now climate change is shifting that pattern, but a radioactive leak has rekindled public concerns about safety. In the Minnesota legislature, views on nuclear power once cleaved largely along party lines. Will consumers be mindful about the relative impact of different EV vehicle options? If you size up CO2 emissions over a vehicle’s lifetime, electricity soundly beats internal combustion – especially as more power is renewably sourced and battery technology gets “cleaner.”High gasoline prices turn heads toward EVs, which can lead to a hunt for affordable EV models. (The EV “high end” keeps getting higher.)The EV story, analysts point out, remains one of net carbon impact. An editorial in the Los Angeles Times decries a wave of bigger – and bigger-battery – EVs. Those are pricier than EVs like the little Bolt hatchback, which General Motors discontinued in favor of pickups. They’re more resource-intensive, too.
NUKE REACTOR MELTDOWN DRIVERS
The demand side – that is, consumer preferences – plays an important role, too.There are full-size EV pickups that can power homes, and some drivers do need big vehicles. For 2022, the firms involved in the mining and manufacturing for those accounted for 27% of Tesla’s total emissions, reports Quartz.But the supply side isn’t the only thing to consider as we think about EVs and making the future work. And such “Scope 3” emissions – including those of suppliers – represented the deepest part of the product line’s carbon footprint.Batteries are a big factor. But this time, in Tesla’s report, it was part of the tally.
What should we make of a recent report from carmaker Tesla reminding us that, even though its cars have no tailpipes, there are significant carbon emissions associated with getting them built and on the road?It’s worth thinking about, though there’s a lot more at play when it comes to electric vehicles and CO2 emissions.The vast network needed to supply raw materials and component parts for EVs makes for difficult accounting.
0 kommentar(er)
