Fact or Not?

@Ghyda Said

Global carbon dioxide emissions from energy in 2017 grew by 1.6% or 426.4 million tons.

In 2017 the United States had the largest decrease in carbon dioxide emissions; -0.5% or 42 million tons. This is the ninth time in this century that the US has had the largest decline in emissions in the world.

The source of the decrease has come because natural gas has displaced coal for the electricity generation.

In second place, Ukraine declined -10.1% or 28.1 tons. I wonder if that happened because they use less electricity.

AEI

The numbers suggest an alternate headline, something like "United States Emissions Down Only 0.5%.

I also wonder about the grammar. Should I say, " A decrease of -0.5% or a decrease of 0.5%?

@Ghyda Said

Global carbon dioxide emissions from energy in 2017 grew by 1.6% or 426.4 million tons.

In 2017 the United States had the largest decrease in carbon dioxide emissions; -0.5% or 42 million tons. This is the ninth time in this century that the US has had the largest decline in emissions in the world.

The source of the decrease has come because natural gas has displaced coal for the electricity generation.

In second place, Ukraine declined -10.1% or 28.1 tons. I wonder if that happened because they use less electricity.

AEI

The numbers suggest an alternate headline, something like "United States Emissions Down Only 0.5%.

I also wonder about the grammar. Should I say, " A decrease of -0.5% or a decrease of 0.5%?

@mrmhead Said

I believe "a decrease of 0.5%" is correct.
The earlier statement with "Largest decrease" has a semi-colon in it before stating "-0.5%", which is also correct.

@chaski Said

The USA is the 2nd largest producer of CO2 emissions.... twice as much as #3.

Ukraine is pretty far down on the list.

@a777pilot Said

Want to get rid of CO2? Then generate electric power by geothermal and nuclear* power. Get rid of wind and solar. Use that money for the two I recommend.

*Thorium, molten salt type reactors.

@Ghyda Said

Has anyone ever built a Thorium, molten salt reactor, which produces commercial electricity?

@chaski Said

I don't know... but am guessing no.

I am not versed in nuclear reactors (other than the quick disconnect, but that is another story)... so will trust wikipedia...

Disadvantages:
> Little development compared to most Gen IV designs .
> Required onsite chemical plant to manage core mixture and remove fission products.
> Required regulatory changes to deal with radically different design features. (This one is no problem as long a Trump is in power)
> MSR designs rely on nickel-based alloys to hold the molten salt. Alloys based on nickel and iron are prone to embrittlement under high neutron flux.
> Corrosion risk.
> As a breeder reactor, a modified MSR might be able to produce weapons-grade nuclear material.
> The MSRE and aircraft nuclear reactors used enrichment levels so high that they approach the levels of nuclear weapons. These levels would be illegal in most modern regulatory regimes for power plants. Some modern designs avoid this issue.
> Neutron damage to solid moderator materials can limit the core lifetime of an MSR that makes moderately fast neutrons. For example, the MSRE was designed so that its graphite moderator sticks had very low tolerances, so neutron damage could change their size without damage. "Two fluid" MSR designs are unable to use graphite piping because graphite changes size when it is bombarded with neutrons, and graphite pipes would crack and leak.

@mrmhead Said

MSR= ? Molten Salt Reactor?

As opposed to SMRs? - I've heard/read about these a bit.

Small modular reactors (SMRs) are a type of nuclear fission reactor which are smaller than conventional reactors, and manufactured at a plant and brought to a site to be fully constructed. Modular reactors allow for less on-site construction, increased containment efficiency, and heightened nuclear materials security. SMRs have been proposed as a less expensive alternative to conventional nuclear reactors.

Several designs exist for SMR, ranging from scaled down versions of existing nuclear reactor designs, to entirely new generation IV designs. Both thermal-neutron reactors and fast-neutron reactors have been proposed.