Coal vs. nuclear

loading...
A report, not yet made public, states that coal-fired electric generating plants emit enough mercury into the atmosphere to cause health problems, especially in children. The cost to remove this mercury would be difficult and expensive, and so far is not required. Since the United…
Sign in or Subscribe to view this content.

A report, not yet made public, states that coal-fired electric generating plants emit enough mercury into the atmosphere to cause health problems, especially in children. The cost to remove this mercury would be difficult and expensive, and so far is not required.

Since the United States generates 54 percent of its electric energy from coal, this is a significant problem. Nuclear plants emit no mercury. Comparisons of the cost of electric energy generated by both coal and nuclear sources have shown coal to be slightly less expensive.

If coal-fired plants were re-quired to rid their emissions of mercury, it might put the balance of costs in favor of nuclear power. Design and construction of nuclear plants can also be streamlined to reduce costs. Nuclear plants also emit no carbon dioxide.

Ed Huff

Old Town


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

By continuing to use this site, you give your consent to our use of cookies for analytics, personalization and ads. Learn more.