• The United States operates 93 commercial nuclear reactors that collectively produce approximately 780 billion kilowatt-hours (TWh) of electricity, which is a substantial amount of energy.
• This output is sufficient to power more than 72 million homes and represents nearly 47% of the nation’s total electricity generation, according to the U.S. Office of Nuclear Energy. Yet, as you can see in the infographic, the US is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels. In 2023, coal made up about 8.7% of total energy consumption and 18.6% of electricity production. And there are approximately 210 coal plants running across the country right now.

• Each coal plant pumps out about 3.2 terawatt-hours (TWh) of energy—enough to power roughly 306,000 homes.

Still, it’s important to note that coal plants also generate a ton of waste. Each plant releases around 333,000 tonnes of waste yearly, contributing to a total of 70 million tonnes of coal waste. And 60-70% of that? It’s fly ash—a harmful byproduct that contains heavy metals such as arsenic, lead and mercury. It’s highly toxic, harmful to ecosystems, and can contaminate soil and water while contributing adversely to climate change.Though 62% of the coal ash was recycled in 2022, the leftover coal waste still far outweighs what nuclear plants produce.         1. Nuclear Power is Cleaner......Nuclear power emits 40 times less carbon than coal. It has powered the U.S. for over 60 years, and with 93 reactors, the country has the largest nuclear fleet in the world. More importantly, the entire sector only generates about 2,000 tonnes of waste per year amounting to about 37.7 tonnes per plant. Compare that to coal, nuclear power is far superior as one of the cleanest energy sources available.                                                                                                                                                                                                                     2. Nuclear Power is Cheaper (And More Reliable).......Not only is nuclear energy cleaner, but it’s also cheaper. nuclear energy costs much less to produce than coal or gas. For example, in the U.S., generating power with coal costs between $75.1 – $96.3 per megawatt-hour (MWh), while nuclear only costs $43.9/MWh......read on          https://carboncredits.com/nuclear-power-vs-coal-three-reasons-why-only-one-will-power-the-next-decade/?utm_source=CarbonCredits.com&utm_campaign=48ebb48e3b-EMAIL_nuclear_infographic_09_2024&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-48ebb48e3b-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

If deployed across the country, these geothermal systems could go a long way in helping decarbonise buildings, which are responsible for about a third of total greenhouse gas emissions in the US.Once a system is in place, buildings can draw heat from water pumped from below their foundations, instead of burning natural gas piped in from afar. Utilities use the same equipment to deploy networked geothermal as they do for gas lines, and even the same kind of pipes – they are just circulating fluid instead of gas. The networks don’t need special geology to operate, so they can be set up almost anywhere. The project in Framingham, then, could be the start of something big. To scale up, a geothermal loop such as Framingham’s might connect to an adjacent neighbourhood, and that one to another. “In the end, what we would like is if the gas utilities become thermal utilities,” said Audrey Schulman, executive director of the nonprofit climate-solutions incubator HEETlabs (a spin-off of the climate nonprofit HEET, which began pitching the idea to Eversource and other utilities in 2017). “Each individual, shared loop can be interconnected, like Lego blocks, to grow bigger and bigger.”.....READ ON     https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/09/every-building-sits-on-a-thermal-asset-how-networked-geothermal-power-could-change-cities

If deployed across the country, these geothermal systems could go a long way in helping decarbonise buildings, which are responsible for about a third of total greenhouse gas emissions in the US. Once a system is in place, buildings can draw heat from water pumped from below their foundations, instead of burning natural gas piped in from afar. Utilities use the same equipment to deploy networked geothermal as they do for gas lines, and even the same kind of pipes – they are just circulating fluid instead of gas. The networks don’t need special geology to operate, so they can be set up almost anywhere. The project in Framingham, then, could be the start of something big. To scale up, a geothermal loop such as Framingham’s might connect to an adjacent neighbourhood, and that one to another. “In the end, what we would like is if the gas utilities become thermal utilities,” said Audrey Schulman, executive director of the nonprofit climate-solutions incubator HEETlabs (a spin-off of the climate nonprofit HEET, which began pitching the idea to Eversource and other utilities in 2017). “Each individual, shared loop can be interconnected, like Lego blocks, to grow bigger and bigger.”.....READ ON   https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/09/every-building-sits-on-a-thermal-asset-how-networked-geothermal-power-could-change-cities