Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Would you mind pointing out where such a difference in treatment is supposed to have taken place?

The title of your table says "in Germany", which implies to me the evaluation of effects in Germany. It is not clear just from the table what was and what wasn't included. But from the numbers for PV, it is clear that not only the costs of the very act of electricity generation were included, but apparently manufacture too. It stands to reason that mining was included, too, especially considering the ecosystems numbers.

Maybe your point is that nuclear mining is a lot worse than coal mining (per kWh produced)? Or is it something else?

I don't know which is worse, though I suspect that coal mining in Germany is less bad than uranium mining in some source countries for Germany. But I guess my main point is that your table means little without knowing the tablemakers' basic assumptions.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue Jan 9th, 2007 at 08:52:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series