When we combine this data (thanks again) with the CO2 generation rates for the other commercially viable base-load generation technologies available, we get an interesting result.Well, the fuel-cycle matters are spread all over. An estimate from the USNRC:
In Appendix L, the NRC staff estimates that the carbon footprint of the fuel cycle to support a reference 1000-MW(e) LWR operating at an 80 percent capacity factor for a 40-year plant life is on the order of 17,000,000 MT of CO2, including a very small contribution from other greenhouse gases (GHGs). Scaling this footprint to the power level of Fermi 3 using the scaling factor of 2 discussed earlier, the NRC staff estimates the carbon footprint for 40 years of fuel cycle emissions to be 34,000,000 MT of CO2 (average annual emissions rate of 850,000 MT, averaged over the period of operation) as compared to a total United States annual emission rate of 5.5 billion MT of CO2 (EPA 2011).
According to DOE in their report on the subject here:
... CO2 generation rates for other base load generation technologies are:
Coal: 2.10 lbs CO2/kWh
Oil: 1.92 lbs CO2/kWh
Natural Gas: 1.31 lbs CO2/kWh
Note these figures are the direct CO2 emissions from combustion only, and do not include the total carbon footprint of the fuel cycle, which would of course add to these figures considerably.
The figure you so helpfully unearthed from NRC for the nuclear fuel cycle is 850,000 tonnes CO2 annually for a Fermi 3-size nuke (net capacity 1520 MWe operating at 80% capacity). This can be taken for practical purposes as the total carbon footprint, since CO2 emissions from the plant itself are negligible.
This calcs out to 0.176 lbs CO2/kWh for the nuke - i.e., a TENTH of the carbon footprint of the other proven commercially viable base-load generation options available to us, even WITHOUT considering the considerable additional carbon footprint associated with the front-end and back-end fuel cycles for the fossil-fueled options.
The conclusion is obvious - if, as we are urged to believe, AGW presents the most serious risk to life on the planet short of a killer comet impact, building nukes as fast as possible to replace all fossil fuel electric power generating stations is the single most effective action we as a society can take to save the planet.
We know how to do this. Let's roll.