However caused, climate warming is accelerating. The earth’s temperature will soon be much higher than was forecast five years ago — with catastrophic consequences soon for ocean levels and much else.<\/strong> Countries are presently making climate warming worse. For these reasons we need to save the most greenhouse gas emissions possible, and thus, in my opinion, the contributions of green energy will be insufficient and too slow.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Therefore, we must have a extensive worldwide program of new nuclear power plants, even if nuclear power is unpopular.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n These assertions are documented on the first nine pages of this website.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Solar and wind power are better choices than doing nothing \u2014 unless they delay the building of nuclear power plants. Only nuclear power can fill in when the wind isn\u2019t blowing, or when the sun isn’t shining, or when there isn\u2019t room for wind turbines or solar collectors; or to eliminate the CO2 from manufacturing batteries. Moreover, when approved and built quickly, nuclear<\/strong> has the<\/strong> lowest emissions<\/strong>, and a very low cost<\/strong>. The table below illustrates this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Comparison of Natural Gas, Nuclear, Wind and Solar Energy: CO2 Savings, Cost, Land Coverage<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the table above, I show the CO2 savings and costs from nuclear, wind and solar power, based upon the extensive calculations in this site’s pages on these subjects (see links in TOC or above). I haven’t seen these calculations anywhere else. For fossil fuel CO2 emissions I use a natural gas in a combined cycle power plant \u2014 the lowest emitting fossil fuel system \u2014 at 330 grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour, assuming that coal, oil, and single cycle gas power plants will be phased out.<\/span><\/em> (If not, if I used 400 grams the percent of saving would increase somewhat, but also the remaining emissions would increase by a much larger amount<\/em>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/span><\/em>Another source of cost information is: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Cost_of_electricity_by_source<\/a>. <\/span>However much of its discussion is inconclusive and does not deal with battery backed solar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Methane emissions, and rogue emissions of banned chloro- and fluoro- hydrocarbons are major causes of rising temperatures. <\/span>We can do much more to rein them it, for example by caping old oil and gas wells and enforcing best practices on new ones, and by eliminating gas appliances, or at least tightening standards for them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We could remove the political restrictions on much cheaper Chinese electric and hybrid cars, until we can compete with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We could license only combined cycle gas new fossil fuel power plants when fossil fuel electricity is necessary, and finish using electricity from coal and oil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We could greatly raise taxes on gasoline (petrol) and diesel, or institute a carbon tax.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Are Humans Contributing to Climate Warming<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nFossil Fuel Savings, cost, and area coverage from Nuclear<\/a>, Wind<\/a> and Solar<\/a> power.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n
\n\t \nENERGY SOURCE OR TECHNOLOGY<\/th> CO2 REDUCTION<\/th> COST PER KILOWATT-HOUR
\nover lifetime of source<\/th><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n \n\t FOSSIL FUEL:Combined Cycle Natural Gas<\/td> 0%<\/td> $ 0.08 or $.09 from facility<\/td> <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Nuclear<\/td> 98%<\/td> less than $ 0.02 in France with government finance; US estimates of 0.02 to 0.07 depending upon source of capital, and rapidness of approval and construction.<\/td> 920<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Land sited wind<\/td> 40% for new turbines<\/td> $0.02 Midwest US, $.03 West US, $0.05 East US.<\/td> 243,000 to 425,000, more square meters for best turbine life.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t New wind offshore in best locations<\/td> 29% to 35% depending on constancy of wind<\/td> $ 0.09<\/td> 240,000 to 1,160,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t <\/td> <\/td> <\/td> <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Solar, no storage, USA Southwest, southern Spain, two-way grid connection*<\/td> 32%<\/td> $ 0.05<\/td> 8,400<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Solar panels, no storage, eastern USA or northern Europe with two-way grid connection*<\/td> 20%<\/td> $0.11<\/td> 17,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Solar panels with storage sufficient for sunny days, no export of excess electricity, USA Southwest or southern Spain<\/td> 49%<\/td> $0.43<\/td> 17,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t Solar thermal, 24 hour storage, USA Southwest. southern Spain<\/td> 69%<\/td> $ 0.16<\/td> 57,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n\t *Reduce all solar savings by 20% if grid connection is only incoming and system is not sized for summer and winter.<\/td> <\/td> <\/td> <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n Additional steps we should take or strongly consider to limit climate warming:<\/h5>\n\n\n\n