chipengineer wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026, 23:09
Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑23 Feb 2026, 10:54
'nuclear power' produces substantial global warming - increasing Earth's heat then dumping most of that increase
these are in law nuclear space heaters (not heat engines) because they are only 35% efficient as engines
their actual GW is 15-20% as bad (relatively) as the GW from 'greenhouse gas' engine power
yes wind farms don't increase Earth's heat - they redistribute natural heat flow so produce substantial warming regionally
(so it's ok because it's not GW ?)
because wind is made by equatorial heat and wind power dumps as heat more energy than it captures
the paper from ScienceDirect predicts 0.24 deg C warming on USA conversion to windfarm electricity
so maybe 1 deg C warming (rather offsetting the ghg savings) from the lavish changes ongoing in the UK
and of course any man-made heat (eg the 10% electricity losses in transmission) is GW in reality (if not in law)
The waste heat (measured in power) generated by all the world's electric power plants is 0.0056% of the power Earth absorbs from the sun. So power plant efficiency does not really matter as far as generating global heat.
well I was writing about the man-made climate-change capacities' of eg ICEVs & EVs (re the F1 rules)
eg Sabine Hossefinder said a houseful of heat from burning natural gas gave 20 housefuls in global-warming by greenhousing
so any non ghg-emissive energy source can be judged by comparison
eg a houseful of nuclear-powered electricity costs in total 3 housefuls of global warming hence is 15% as bad as gas
nuclear fuel (like fossil fuel) when used is adding to Earth's energy
and wind power seems worse than this '15% bad' - though its warming is local and strictly not global warming
the UK has 40 GW of wind power capacity under way