Search Results for: sovacool

Antinuclear activist | Fossil fuel competition | Guest Columns | Politics of Nuclear Energy | Wind energy

Benjamin Sovacool takes issue with Lorenzini’s criticism of his work
ByGuest Author July 11, 2013July 4, 2020

…Quite obviously more research is required. The problem with scholarship at Sovacool‘s level is that Sovacool tends to use multiple black boxes; that is complex scientific papers that base their arguments on passages derived wholly or in part from other scientific papers. In addition, scientific papers may have been questioned by critics, but the quotation may contain no reference to the criticism unless one is familiar with the whole network of re…

Read More Benjamin Sovacool takes issue with Lorenzini’s criticism of his work
Alternative energy | Guest Columns | Paul Lorenzini | Uranium mining | Wind energy

Nukes kill more birds than wind?
ByGuest Author April 30, 2013July 4, 2020

…data.” Their corrected number for bird kills at the six sites examined by Sovacool results in 0.653 fatalities per GWh, significantly higher than Sovacool’s 0.269. Using a broader sample of wind sites, they arrive at 1.46/GWh, over five times Sovacool’s estimate. When bats are added, it increases to 2.94/GWh. The end result is not too surprising – wind power kills lots of birds and bats, by factors of ten more than nuclear power. It’s a major con…

Read More Nukes kill more birds than wind?
Antinuclear activist | Guest Columns | Paul Lorenzini | Wind energy

Lorenzini rebuts Sovacool’s defense of nuclear bird kill paper as weak
ByGuest Author July 13, 2013July 4, 2020

…ww.beyondnuclear.org/storage/seabrook-renewables/seab_lra_10202010_exhibit_sovacool_nuclear_ghg_2008.pdf) and the Fritsche and Lim (2006) article Sovacool cites for his figures seems to be this English-language version (http://www.oeko.de/oekodoc/315/2006-017-en.pdf) ] In fairness, the F-L paper’s wording is ambiguous, so it’s easy to misunderstand. F-L wrote: “[T]he GEMIS model calculates some 31 grams of CO2 per kWh of electricity generated in n…

Read More Lorenzini rebuts Sovacool’s defense of nuclear bird kill paper as weak
Uncategorized

Overcoming Mythology – Real Analysis Regarding Carbon Intensity of Uranium Fuel Cycle
ByRod Adams January 18, 2011July 16, 2020

…and over and over again. If we’re asking who has analyzed the issue more, Sovacool has. Dones did not include either operation or decommissioning, and in Sovacool‘s study, every part of the cycle matters. The “average” of 66 g/kWh is taken by only averaging the values given for each part of the cycle. In other words, although Dones gives a number of 5-10 g/kWh, Sovacool‘s interpretation of Dones’s number is higher than this. Aside from the fact t…

Read More Overcoming Mythology – Real Analysis Regarding Carbon Intensity of Uranium Fuel Cycle
Atomic Advocacy | Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy | Guest Columns

Open letter to antinuclear groups claiming to be “environmental”
ByGuest Author February 10, 2014July 11, 2020

…a commenter here found the Vatenfall study unconvincing. He also found the Sovacool one probably correct, Sovacool actually used the Storm numbers 4 times in the 19 studies he really included, and made significant error with 2 other studies. Criticizing the Vatenfall study for not including auxiliary services requires to have checked if the study it’s compared to have included them, they are not by nature massively more expensive than for wind per…

Read More Open letter to antinuclear groups claiming to be “environmental”
Atomic Advocacy | Atomic politics | Nuclear Communications

Appealing to the hearts and minds of the people at APIEL
ByRod Adams October 26, 2015July 6, 2020

…eated by harvesting southeastern US forests. One presenter quoted Benjamin Sovacool’s numbers for nuclear energy’s life cycle CO2 emissions, saying that his study reported that nuclear produced six times as much CO2 per unit of output energy as wind. I asked him why he accepted the IPCC as a credible source of information when it came to their warnings about climate change but not their recommendations for solutions and not their representative nu…

Read More Appealing to the hearts and minds of the people at APIEL
Antinuclear activist | Atomic Advocacy | Nuclear Communications | Nuclear professionals

Nuclear professional explains why he strongly reacts to antinuclear statements
ByGuest Author July 16, 2013July 4, 2020

…ding false negative information about nuclear energy. By Bill Rogers @ Dr. Sovacool, First let me say that I appreciate the forthrightness in your responses as I came at you fairly hard and you are coming into the lion’s den. Also Charles Barton raises several points in his response that are valid for me to consider. However, as I hope to explain, I have come to my opinions based on years of experience in the energy generation trenches. I would li…

Read More Nuclear professional explains why he strongly reacts to antinuclear statements
Antinuclear activist

I owe Amory Lovins an apology
ByRod Adams March 29, 2014July 16, 2020

…Higher prices do not always mean higher energy bills. Rod Adams @Benjamin Sovacool That’s good to know. However, I’m still a little confused. If wind-generated electricity has essentially no marginal cost and does not produce any emissions, why would you want people to waste time and money — both items in short supply — figuring out ways to use less of it? Why not encourage people to use all they want, after all, there’s always more wind, isn’t…

Read More I owe Amory Lovins an apology
Antinuclear activist | Fossil fuel competition

Crowd sourced analysis of a Lovins sales pitch
ByRod Adams September 7, 2014July 14, 2020

…process heat. Rod Adams @Charles Barton You might have missed the posts on Sovacool that have been published here. https://atomicinsights.com/?s=sovacool Continuing to pursue additional ammunition against Lovins has not stopped us from discussing others like Mark Cooper, Benjamin Sovacool, Arnie Gundersen, Joe Romm, Paul Gunter, Ralph Nader, Michael Mariotte or others. Rod Adams @Keith Pickering Lovins also obfuscates by claiming that electricity…

Read More Crowd sourced analysis of a Lovins sales pitch
Uncategorized

Update: One-Woman Crusade to Encourage Exelon to Restore the Zion Nuclear Power Plant and Operate it In Her Backyard
ByRod Adams December 11, 2010July 21, 2020

…e” can very easily produce numbers that do not match reality? My beef with Sovacool and Storm-Smith is that they use a confusing methodology to estimate the energy consumption for an activity that is ongoing today, instead of just measuring it. The Rossing mine is producing about 3,000 tons of uranium every year from very low ore concentrations. If their numbers were close to accurate, some very strange things would have to be happening – like a s…

Read More Update: One-Woman Crusade to Encourage Exelon to Restore the Zion Nuclear Power Plant and Operate it In Her Backyard
Aging nuclear | Antinuclear activist | Climate change | Economics | Fossil fuel competition

Cooper’s criticism may awaken nuclear competitive spirit
ByRod Adams July 22, 2013July 4, 2020

…hat for lack of evidence that nuclear kills birds, as he admitted himself, Sovacool automatically jumps to causality that nuclear kills birds. He said that his article was peer reviewed but fails to admit that he probably was crucified in the process of that review but persisted in publishing his work as an article and not a scientific research. As for Cooper, well I think Rod has made a point as to his well balanced efforts of in his article that…

Read More Cooper’s criticism may awaken nuclear competitive spirit
Alternative energy | Climate change | Fossil fuel competition

Aspen Institute’s Panel Discussion on American Energy Leadership
ByRod Adams August 26, 2014July 6, 2020

…wrong then and continue to be wrong now. As I said then, it is absurd for Sovacool to admit that Storm-Smith was flawed and controversial and yet still include it, along with several derivatives of it, in a meta study that excludes inputs just because they are not academically “peer-reviewed.” Do you think that reviews by regulatory bodies and internal reviews to ensure numerical accuracy and methodology legitimacy are somehow less stringent than…

Read More Aspen Institute’s Panel Discussion on American Energy Leadership

End of content

Follow Atomic Insights