quote Originally posted by williegoat: It doesn't have to be, but it is. Regarding carbon emissions, production of electricity adds carbon to the atmosphere, unless of course it is hydroelectric or nuclear powered. Hydroelectric power requires water and guess what? It takes a half a million gallons of water to produce one ton of lithium. The power that is delivered to my house is a mix of hydroelectric and nuclear. Let's build more nuclear power plants, OK?

I am not going to pretend that I can "vouch" for the accuracy of this research. On the face of what I read, it did include projected emissions from electrical power generation. They used data and methodology from the U.S. Energy Information Administration or EIA.

Reducing the impacts of lithium mining, including the demand for water--somebody's thinking about it. I read about that just the other day, but I don't remember it that clearly.

Here's fresh support for the idea that "Carbon emissions are the boss."

"Ocean heat hit record high in 2021 as Earth warms, NOAA says"

quote “Science leaves no room for doubt: Climate change is the existential threat of our time,” NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said.

Denise Chow for NBC News; January 13, 2022.
https://www.nbcnews.com/sci...-noaa-says-rcna12079

I wouldn't say that electrification of road vehicles is the one thing that can mitigate this threat. I think it's widely perceived as necessary, but not sufficient.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2022).]

OK, then if we want to reduce air pollution, we should really start with...uh...what was that place? Oh yeah...China.

Also, transportation is responsible for only 14% of greenhouse gasses. Can you tell me what industry causes the greatest percentage?



That's right.

source: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemis...e-gas-emissions-data

Does this make me an environmentalist? You may call me a tree hugger because a large percentage of income over my lifetime came directly from trees.

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 01-14-2022).]

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2022).]

[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 01-14-2022).]

quote Originally posted by williegoat: We should be promoting nuclear power. Why not nuclear [powered] cargo ships? Are there any? I'll bet maryjane has some insight here.

Since I've never been aboard an ocean-going vessel, except some that were docked, I don't have maryjane's seafaring insight. But I do have the Internet and its content-retrieval accoutrements, such as Google. Chiefly, Google, although from time to time I've resorted to DuckDuckGo when the Google web page has been temporarily down or slow to respond. These are my findings:

Russia's NS Sevmorput is the only nuclear powered cargo ship currently afloat and in service. At least, as recently as 4Q 2021.

Russia has a tradition of nuclear powered icebreakers, and I think that continues to this day.

The NS Savannah was the only U.S. nuclear powered cargo and passenger ship. It was operational from 1962 to 1972.

Let's break all that down:

quote The world's only nuclear powered cargo ship yesterday set sail from the Russian port of St Petersburg laden with a cargo of components destined for the Rooppur nuclear power plant under construction in Bangladesh. The NS Sevmorput, which is operated by Rosatom enterprise Atomflot, is transporting the 1400 tonne cargo - described as mainly comprising "metal structures and mechanisms" - to the port of Vladivostock.

World Nuclear News; November 3, 2021. Brief report includes photograph.
https://world-nuclear-news....s-Rooppur-components


Timelab Pro (YouTube channel) video of two Russian nuclear powered icebreakers; 3 minutes duration; posted June 12, 2019. The remarkably high resolution video is from March, 2018. The beginning of it, which is speeded up, seems like a video game, but then it gets "real." This must be the apex of nuclear powered icebreaker videos. The pinnacle of this genre. The video to end all such videos.
https://youtu.be/bKaVhXn49xY

quote In 1955, President Eisenhower proposed construction of a nuclear powered merchant vessel to promote the visionary Atoms for Peace program. NS Savannah was hailed as a "bold and enterprising experiment in the daring and distinguished annals of American science and seafaring." The 596-foot ship had cargo capacity of 9,900 tons and accommodated 60 passengers. From 1962 to 1972, [Savannah] operated as an experiment to assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of nuclear power in commercial shipping. Due to high operating costs, the ship was taken out of service in 1972. [The ship] was designated a National Historic Landmark [an oxymoron, if ever there was one] in 1991 and is currently [docked in Baltimore Harbor.]

HMdb(.org)
https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=19558

NS Savannah Association online; includes an extensive virtual tour.
http://ns-savannah.org/nssa.pl?page=virtualtour

CLICK FOR FULL SIZE

NS Savannah

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-15-2022).]

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 01-24-2022).]

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-25-2022).]