Comment This was a nuclear industry hatchet piece (Score 1) 376
Environmental Progress is not a true science journal, and this was not a peer review study. It was a hatchet piece by a paid nuclear industry shill organization. I can spot several major flaws with this study right away:
1. They assume panels will cease to be used at the end of their rated lifespan. In truth, panels continue to work well beyond their rated lifespan. They will typically continue to produce 80% or higher of their rated capacity even after 25 years and will degrade only very slowly.
2. They also assume all panels will just be thrown away, rather than being refurbished or recycled.
3. The toxic chemicals that go into panel production tend to be bound into stable structures that do not easily break down even if they were discarded in landfills.
4. Newer panels use far less of these compounds than the generation of panels than they used in their study.
In short it was a hatchet job, not a legitimate study... but what would you expect from an organization called Environmental Progress that seems to only put out pro-nuclear articles. I'm actually pro-nuclear... but I'm against propaganda masquerading as science.