Post by carstencheyne on Feb 4, 2014 8:41:44 GMT -5
Renewable Energy v Nuclear Energy
The ongoing conflict between Renewable Energy and Nuclear Energy and which will have a greater grasp on the world's leading energy supply is a highly controversial issue nowadays, due to the rapid decline in 'Fossil Fuels' - Coal, Natural Gas and Oil - in modern society.
Many people in the world today view nuclear power as being an extremely 'safe' and 'secure' means of obtaining power due to the ever-growing demand for more and more power because can provide more energy than any other source. However this is nowhere near the truth as Nuclear Power is by no means 'safe'. If we look to the past we can easily see the Nuclear Energy is the complete opposite of safe. To cite one incident, probably the most infamous, of Nuclear Energy not being safe, in 1986 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine an experiment went horrifically wrong. The reactor contained about 211 boron control rods whilst only 30 were actually required. However, mistakes were made that only 8 rods remained in the reactor which caused the nuclear reaction to go madly out of control. So much heat was generated that there was a meltdown and the coolant water had started to boil. To make this even worse, due to the pressure of the steam being created there was an explosion that caused the reactor lid to come off. The cores made of graphite inside of the reactor had caught fire and an extremely large amount of radioactive substances escaped. These substances were transported to place such as Europe and the USA due to the wind. In the end, approximately 3 million people were exposed to the radiation in Ukraine alone and about 4000 of the people assigned to clear up the mess had died due to radiation poisoning. To this day, many of the surrounding cities and towns nearby this disaster still remain as an empty, desolate area, and it will remain like this for at least another 20,000 years if not more. This easily demonstrates that if there is a slight mistake in the reactor it could cause a widespread pestilence obliterating all life nearby for many millennia. Chernobyl's legacy should be adequate to halt the pursuit of nuclear power due to the excruciatingly terrifying amount of death and despair.
It has been disasters like this that have led to this controversial, and highly underfunded, search for another safer supply of energy. Eventually, after years of searching, we came across a much safer energy supply. Renewable Energy. One man who has spent about 30 years of his life creating and installing nuclear and fossil fuel power stations believes that Renewable Energy may be the key to Earth's survival. This man is Allan Moore. Mr Moore is now chair of the BWEA (British Wind Energy Association) and the head of renewables at the National Wind Power and he argues that the current debate lacks a sense of proportion. He argues that:
“In the 17th century, we had 90,000 windmills in Britain. They were a part of life. What we're looking to do now is install perhaps 4,000 turbines, making 5,000 in total. Roughly half will be onshore and half offshore. If 4,000 turbines sound a lot, compare this to Germany, where last year alone they installed more than 2,500 MW of capacity, and now have 7,000 turbines.”
This demonstrates the sheer magnitude of Renewable Energy's capability. Also, a combination of onshore and offshore turbines has the potential to supply up to a total of 35% of the UK's electricity alone which is a very promising figure for the future. Another interesting statistic was released recently to show the full extent of Renewable Energy's superiority,
“With 40% of Europe's total available wind power resources, the UK has theoretically enough to meet its electricity needs eight times over.”
This statistic shows easily that if every country in Europe adds more and more turbines they could easily manage to supply electricity to all the countries of the European Union who require it.
Therefore, the greatest barrier in the energy crisis is our own diplomatic relations and that every country would have to help for renewables to work. Also, as a ‘side-effect’ it could also potentially lead to a more united world.
As we search for more means of renewable energy we created a miracle device. This is Microgen. Microgen is a climate-friendly and fairly low-cost energy, and has a vast number of further advantages. For example: it reduces both the total supply capacity required within networks, and the need for 'peak provision' – one of the biggest headaches for utility managers. Since the power would be generated for use locally, there is a substantial decrease in the amount of power lost through transmission, which leads to even further major energy efficient gains. Ofgem, the gas and electricity regulator, calculate that since the power lost as heat on the grid is almost negligible due to Microgen, it would save the UK about 1 billion pounds a year. Microgen also gives greater diversity in terms of power, source and location so effectively reducing the vulnerability of the system overall.
When a large power station 'collapses' a whole area may suffer from a blackout, as happened recently in New York and Italy. However if Renewable Energy was utilised, these areas may not have suffered from such a blackout for as long. Microgen creates a broader, more secure basis of energy supply. Another 'illuminating' statistic is that if 10 million consumers installed 2kW of Microgen PV or wind systems each, they would supply as much power as the nuclear programme, here in the UK. This too shows that Nuclear Power lies obsolete in the face of Renewable Energy if everyone participates. Another interesting project to try to generate more energy through renewables is the Desertec Project. The Desertec project aims to generate electricity in deserts utilising solar power plants and wind farms to transfer this electricity to consumption centres. The first region for application of this concept is in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and Europe. Solar power systems and wind farms spread over an area of 17,000 km2 (roughly 0.2% of the Sahara desert) would provide a considerable part of the electricity demand of the MENA countries and provide continental Europe with approximately 15% of its electricity needs.
So, how will this affect the world as a whole? Well, some people argue that Renewable Energy could never fill the looming decline in energy (partially created due to many nuclear shutdowns). However, research now shows that a broad combination of renewable energies tapped into with a range of micro, small, medium and larger scale technologies, and applied flexibly, could easily meet all of our demands. Better still, such an approach has the ability to create a brand new access to power supplies for lots of people around the world who lack such basic necessities such as lit homes or the ability to cook without inhaling toxic, perhaps even lethal, fumes.
Will this affect the rapid growth of unemployment? To put it bluntly, yes it would. Currently in the UK there are about 8,000 jobs in Renewable Energy and this is set to increase dramatically by 25,000 jobs in the UK alone by 2020. However, the good news isn't just limited to the United Kingdom. In the USA there is speculated to be about 1.3 million more jobs by 2020 in the field of Renewable Energy. This shows that Renewable Energy laughs in the face of unemployment.
This conflict has drawn many contrasting arguments, but I believe that Renewable Energy is the future. Yes, Nuclear energy might help right now but if we look further into the future we can easily see that Renewables are the only way for our world to continue spinning on. If we do use Nuclear reactors, yes there may not be anything like Chernobyl, but there would always be the possibility for such a tragedy to occur once more.
Bibliography:
www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/nuclear/
www.evwind.es/2011/05/08/nuclear-power-vs-renewable-energy-development/11488
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/30/renewable-energy-nuclear-power
news.softpedia.com/news/Nuclear-Energy-Vs-Renewable-Power-Sources-96193.shtml
www.cus.net/news/news4.html
www.cereplast.com/the-nuclear-debate-nuclear-power-energy-vs-renewable-energy-sources/
Energy Essentials: Nuclear Energy by Nigel Sauders and Steven Chapman
The ongoing conflict between Renewable Energy and Nuclear Energy and which will have a greater grasp on the world's leading energy supply is a highly controversial issue nowadays, due to the rapid decline in 'Fossil Fuels' - Coal, Natural Gas and Oil - in modern society.
Many people in the world today view nuclear power as being an extremely 'safe' and 'secure' means of obtaining power due to the ever-growing demand for more and more power because can provide more energy than any other source. However this is nowhere near the truth as Nuclear Power is by no means 'safe'. If we look to the past we can easily see the Nuclear Energy is the complete opposite of safe. To cite one incident, probably the most infamous, of Nuclear Energy not being safe, in 1986 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine an experiment went horrifically wrong. The reactor contained about 211 boron control rods whilst only 30 were actually required. However, mistakes were made that only 8 rods remained in the reactor which caused the nuclear reaction to go madly out of control. So much heat was generated that there was a meltdown and the coolant water had started to boil. To make this even worse, due to the pressure of the steam being created there was an explosion that caused the reactor lid to come off. The cores made of graphite inside of the reactor had caught fire and an extremely large amount of radioactive substances escaped. These substances were transported to place such as Europe and the USA due to the wind. In the end, approximately 3 million people were exposed to the radiation in Ukraine alone and about 4000 of the people assigned to clear up the mess had died due to radiation poisoning. To this day, many of the surrounding cities and towns nearby this disaster still remain as an empty, desolate area, and it will remain like this for at least another 20,000 years if not more. This easily demonstrates that if there is a slight mistake in the reactor it could cause a widespread pestilence obliterating all life nearby for many millennia. Chernobyl's legacy should be adequate to halt the pursuit of nuclear power due to the excruciatingly terrifying amount of death and despair.
It has been disasters like this that have led to this controversial, and highly underfunded, search for another safer supply of energy. Eventually, after years of searching, we came across a much safer energy supply. Renewable Energy. One man who has spent about 30 years of his life creating and installing nuclear and fossil fuel power stations believes that Renewable Energy may be the key to Earth's survival. This man is Allan Moore. Mr Moore is now chair of the BWEA (British Wind Energy Association) and the head of renewables at the National Wind Power and he argues that the current debate lacks a sense of proportion. He argues that:
“In the 17th century, we had 90,000 windmills in Britain. They were a part of life. What we're looking to do now is install perhaps 4,000 turbines, making 5,000 in total. Roughly half will be onshore and half offshore. If 4,000 turbines sound a lot, compare this to Germany, where last year alone they installed more than 2,500 MW of capacity, and now have 7,000 turbines.”
This demonstrates the sheer magnitude of Renewable Energy's capability. Also, a combination of onshore and offshore turbines has the potential to supply up to a total of 35% of the UK's electricity alone which is a very promising figure for the future. Another interesting statistic was released recently to show the full extent of Renewable Energy's superiority,
“With 40% of Europe's total available wind power resources, the UK has theoretically enough to meet its electricity needs eight times over.”
This statistic shows easily that if every country in Europe adds more and more turbines they could easily manage to supply electricity to all the countries of the European Union who require it.
Therefore, the greatest barrier in the energy crisis is our own diplomatic relations and that every country would have to help for renewables to work. Also, as a ‘side-effect’ it could also potentially lead to a more united world.
As we search for more means of renewable energy we created a miracle device. This is Microgen. Microgen is a climate-friendly and fairly low-cost energy, and has a vast number of further advantages. For example: it reduces both the total supply capacity required within networks, and the need for 'peak provision' – one of the biggest headaches for utility managers. Since the power would be generated for use locally, there is a substantial decrease in the amount of power lost through transmission, which leads to even further major energy efficient gains. Ofgem, the gas and electricity regulator, calculate that since the power lost as heat on the grid is almost negligible due to Microgen, it would save the UK about 1 billion pounds a year. Microgen also gives greater diversity in terms of power, source and location so effectively reducing the vulnerability of the system overall.
When a large power station 'collapses' a whole area may suffer from a blackout, as happened recently in New York and Italy. However if Renewable Energy was utilised, these areas may not have suffered from such a blackout for as long. Microgen creates a broader, more secure basis of energy supply. Another 'illuminating' statistic is that if 10 million consumers installed 2kW of Microgen PV or wind systems each, they would supply as much power as the nuclear programme, here in the UK. This too shows that Nuclear Power lies obsolete in the face of Renewable Energy if everyone participates. Another interesting project to try to generate more energy through renewables is the Desertec Project. The Desertec project aims to generate electricity in deserts utilising solar power plants and wind farms to transfer this electricity to consumption centres. The first region for application of this concept is in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and Europe. Solar power systems and wind farms spread over an area of 17,000 km2 (roughly 0.2% of the Sahara desert) would provide a considerable part of the electricity demand of the MENA countries and provide continental Europe with approximately 15% of its electricity needs.
So, how will this affect the world as a whole? Well, some people argue that Renewable Energy could never fill the looming decline in energy (partially created due to many nuclear shutdowns). However, research now shows that a broad combination of renewable energies tapped into with a range of micro, small, medium and larger scale technologies, and applied flexibly, could easily meet all of our demands. Better still, such an approach has the ability to create a brand new access to power supplies for lots of people around the world who lack such basic necessities such as lit homes or the ability to cook without inhaling toxic, perhaps even lethal, fumes.
Will this affect the rapid growth of unemployment? To put it bluntly, yes it would. Currently in the UK there are about 8,000 jobs in Renewable Energy and this is set to increase dramatically by 25,000 jobs in the UK alone by 2020. However, the good news isn't just limited to the United Kingdom. In the USA there is speculated to be about 1.3 million more jobs by 2020 in the field of Renewable Energy. This shows that Renewable Energy laughs in the face of unemployment.
This conflict has drawn many contrasting arguments, but I believe that Renewable Energy is the future. Yes, Nuclear energy might help right now but if we look further into the future we can easily see that Renewables are the only way for our world to continue spinning on. If we do use Nuclear reactors, yes there may not be anything like Chernobyl, but there would always be the possibility for such a tragedy to occur once more.
Bibliography:
www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/nuclear/
www.evwind.es/2011/05/08/nuclear-power-vs-renewable-energy-development/11488
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/30/renewable-energy-nuclear-power
news.softpedia.com/news/Nuclear-Energy-Vs-Renewable-Power-Sources-96193.shtml
www.cus.net/news/news4.html
www.cereplast.com/the-nuclear-debate-nuclear-power-energy-vs-renewable-energy-sources/
Energy Essentials: Nuclear Energy by Nigel Sauders and Steven Chapman