Re: background vs man-made emissions Thread-Enrichment energy demand

[RadiumProj@cs.com]

In a message dated 5/1/00 5:08:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
jmuckerheide@delphi.com writes:

<< 
 Only enrichment takes any meaningful energy in the nuclear fuel cycle/MWH, 
and
 if the anti-nukes hadn't prevented building nukes for enrichment, we wouldn't
 need that!
  >>
=========
I recollect that a number of reviews of the Health and Safety evaluation of 
the Coal vs. Nuclear Fuel Cycle were conducted by various governmental and 
private organizations back in the late 1970s and early 1980s. One by R. 
Gotchy of the NRC/AEC? at the time [about 1978?] assumed, I believe, that if 
all the energy for the nuclear fuel cycle's enrichment requirements came from 
coal fired power plants it would require about 40 to 50 MWe of coal generated 
electricity as an input to uranium enrichment per 1000 Mwe nuclear 
generation. 

The environmental and public health impacts of this 50 MWe, give or take, 
coal fired generation per 1000 MWe nuclear generation could of course be 
eliminated if the electricity were derived from nuclear plants.

Stewart Farber


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html