Self-reply: d'oh, I may have misinterpreted on this too; the data in the report is a little more complex.
I was comparing the 'max' lifetime estimates per-source (the third value in the column) rather than the medians (second value).
Using the medians, wind is cleanest, followed by nuclear, followed by solar. I'd encourage anyone interested to read the linked report to confirm their understanding.
It'd be nice to find trends over time to see whether these estimates (and thus the overall ordering) is likely to remain stable, or whether recent developments may change the situation.
yeah, thanks for this, and sorry for edits, I need to search for a good reference on manufacturing/recycling emissions for renewables, i think the report either excludes or underestimates the bootstrapping and maintenance carbon footprint. I got my original info from a professor in nuclear engineering program years ago, I wish I still had the notes.
All good, and no problem - I try to follow a mostly-append-only commenting approach where possible, hence the edit notes.
Glad to read what you find; I think some of these figures may also be due for updates given the latest updates around small modular reactors -- and no doubt renewable tech continues to advance too.
I was comparing the 'max' lifetime estimates per-source (the third value in the column) rather than the medians (second value).
Using the medians, wind is cleanest, followed by nuclear, followed by solar. I'd encourage anyone interested to read the linked report to confirm their understanding.
It'd be nice to find trends over time to see whether these estimates (and thus the overall ordering) is likely to remain stable, or whether recent developments may change the situation.