Nuke PowerEssay title: Nuke PowerNuclear power plants have improved steadily over the last ten years.Nuclear power plants are a safe, clean and reliable source of energy production. They are uniquely qualified to meet the growing demand for energy in the U.S. It is estimated that the demand for power will grow two and a half percent per year. Even if the demand for energy didn’t increase in the future but stayed where it is nuclear would still be the best choice for power production. Nuclear costs less and is environmentally cleaner than coal, which currently supplies approximately fifty percent of the power in the U.S. (Loewen 53). In addition nuclear has an exemplary safety record. The group of people who oppose nuclear and promote renewable power sources, hereafter termed environmentalists, do so for very sound reasons. However, they fail to realize that renewables, wind and solar power, cannot supply the base-load electricity needed for the power grid. They also don’t realize that of the five power sources that can supply base-load electricity, coal, oil, hydroelectric dams, nuclear and natural gas, nuclear outranks the others either in cost or environmental safety or both.
To understand nuclear power we need to have a general understanding of how it is generated in most nuclear plants. This is a general description only and makes no claim to encompass all the different variations possible for the design of nuclear power plants. Nuclear energy is produced from the nuclear fission reaction of a heavy nucleus such as uranium absorbing a neutron after which it splits into two fragments of nearly equal mass. This releases a substantial amount of energy and several more neutrons. The neutrons are then able to strike other heavy nuclei and cause them to fission, releasing more energy. This process occurring continuously results in a chain reaction in which many billions of nuclei may fission in a small fraction of second. In a nuclear reactor the self-sustaining series of fissions is carefully controlled. The enormous amount of energy released occurs in the form of radiation and the kinetic energy of the fission products expelled at high speeds. Most of the energy becomes thermal and is used to heat water and convert it to high-pressure steam. The steam is then used to drive a turbine and the mechanical energy of the turbine is converted to electricity by means of a generator (Britannica).
Environmentalists argue against nuclear power on the grounds of the danger of the radiation emitted by nuclear reactors and nuclear waste, the problems with the disposal of nuclear waste and, finally, that renewable energy sources can supply all the power necessary to meet any growth in demand (Lake Lovins Lovins 44). They claim w e don’t need nuclear, because renewables are a better, cleaner option. These first two objections to nuclear energy are undeniable. Radiation is dangerous and there are problems with nuclear waste. The third argument against nuclear energy has merit but environmentalists don’t take into account some of the realities about renewables (Loewen 52).
Renewables are better environmentally than any other power source under specific circumstances. The two most touted renewable energy sources are wind power and solar power. The specific circumstances in which they are better are when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining. Unfortunately, neither the wind nor the sun can be guaranteed to function for any specific date or time. The sun can only be guaranteed not to shine for approximately twelve hours a day and wind has no guarantees at all. Also, technology is not advanced enough to adequately harness the power provided by the sun and wind when they are available. It would take five hundred times the amount of land to build a solar plant with the same output as a nuclear plant (Oliver Hospers 24-25).
This leaves a lot of room on the cost of a renewable energy system. For energy use purposes, renewables are probably most cost effective. What a few low cost solar plants can provide is a significant boost in power, allowing the grid to be more responsive to energy demand.
Energy Efficiency of the Solar System
What is the biggest shortcoming of wind power? Wind power is far more efficient than fossil fuels in terms of the amount of energy it produces and its power demand. Wind energy, unlike fossil fuels, is much more efficient than fossil fuels by virtue of its carbon-intensive (though still technically efficient) form of energy generation. Wind energy can be produced when the solar panels are off. That means that even at zero energy consumption, a wind turbine of nearly 1 meter (25 feet) (W) can produce electricity of nearly 17,000 W in a 15-minute lifetime.
Solar Power and Climate Change:
An effective plan for combating temperature and warming is not one to be discarded completely, but to be thoroughly revisited and evaluated. The U.S. currently has about 20 times as many wind turbines than any other nation (U.S. EEA 2011, 12:2). It’s worth mentioning that there is a real danger inherent in increasing the solar industry’s efficiency. Since the solar sector is heavily relied upon in the U.S., it is very difficult for the U.S. economy to meet all of its solar power demand targets.
Solar Power Costs:
Solar Power’s cost to operate each system has been very high. With the U.S. reaching an 80-year high, it’s clear that it costs more per watt than any other power source on the planet. An estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that the total cost of solar power in 2010 was $44.6 billion. (See also EIA 2010 Solar Energy Report, p. 43.) The U.S. Solar Energy Society estimates that the U.S. PV industry currently receives a combined total of $11.9 billion ($28.9 billion worldwide), which represents roughly $9.4 billion per annum.
Another source of U.S. energy costs in comparison to the average for other countries? Well, the U.S. solar economy is quite competitive in terms of its overall competitiveness. In 2000, the U.S. solar industry produced more solar than for any other large country, but the industry grew by more than 20 percent between 2000 and 2012 (See United States Wind Investment Market, Table 1). The U.S. solar industry grew at twice the rate of the developed market as the developed market: roughly 20 percent in 2005; and only six percent in 2006.
Solar Power’s Cost vs. Renewable Electricity Market
Solar power is an energy form of energy storage. The energy that can go into the batteries in the solar cells used to charge the cells can be stored for about 10 years in the sun-free
This leaves a lot of room on the cost of a renewable energy system. For energy use purposes, renewables are probably most cost effective. What a few low cost solar plants can provide is a significant boost in power, allowing the grid to be more responsive to energy demand.
Energy Efficiency of the Solar System
What is the biggest shortcoming of wind power? Wind power is far more efficient than fossil fuels in terms of the amount of energy it produces and its power demand. Wind energy, unlike fossil fuels, is much more efficient than fossil fuels by virtue of its carbon-intensive (though still technically efficient) form of energy generation. Wind energy can be produced when the solar panels are off. That means that even at zero energy consumption, a wind turbine of nearly 1 meter (25 feet) (W) can produce electricity of nearly 17,000 W in a 15-minute lifetime.
Solar Power and Climate Change:
An effective plan for combating temperature and warming is not one to be discarded completely, but to be thoroughly revisited and evaluated. The U.S. currently has about 20 times as many wind turbines than any other nation (U.S. EEA 2011, 12:2). It’s worth mentioning that there is a real danger inherent in increasing the solar industry’s efficiency. Since the solar sector is heavily relied upon in the U.S., it is very difficult for the U.S. economy to meet all of its solar power demand targets.
Solar Power Costs:
Solar Power’s cost to operate each system has been very high. With the U.S. reaching an 80-year high, it’s clear that it costs more per watt than any other power source on the planet. An estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that the total cost of solar power in 2010 was $44.6 billion. (See also EIA 2010 Solar Energy Report, p. 43.) The U.S. Solar Energy Society estimates that the U.S. PV industry currently receives a combined total of $11.9 billion ($28.9 billion worldwide), which represents roughly $9.4 billion per annum.
Another source of U.S. energy costs in comparison to the average for other countries? Well, the U.S. solar economy is quite competitive in terms of its overall competitiveness. In 2000, the U.S. solar industry produced more solar than for any other large country, but the industry grew by more than 20 percent between 2000 and 2012 (See United States Wind Investment Market, Table 1). The U.S. solar industry grew at twice the rate of the developed market as the developed market: roughly 20 percent in 2005; and only six percent in 2006.
Solar Power’s Cost vs. Renewable Electricity Market
Solar power is an energy form of energy storage. The energy that can go into the batteries in the solar cells used to charge the cells can be stored for about 10 years in the sun-free
This leaves a lot of room on the cost of a renewable energy system. For energy use purposes, renewables are probably most cost effective. What a few low cost solar plants can provide is a significant boost in power, allowing the grid to be more responsive to energy demand.
Energy Efficiency of the Solar System
What is the biggest shortcoming of wind power? Wind power is far more efficient than fossil fuels in terms of the amount of energy it produces and its power demand. Wind energy, unlike fossil fuels, is much more efficient than fossil fuels by virtue of its carbon-intensive (though still technically efficient) form of energy generation. Wind energy can be produced when the solar panels are off. That means that even at zero energy consumption, a wind turbine of nearly 1 meter (25 feet) (W) can produce electricity of nearly 17,000 W in a 15-minute lifetime.
Solar Power and Climate Change:
An effective plan for combating temperature and warming is not one to be discarded completely, but to be thoroughly revisited and evaluated. The U.S. currently has about 20 times as many wind turbines than any other nation (U.S. EEA 2011, 12:2). It’s worth mentioning that there is a real danger inherent in increasing the solar industry’s efficiency. Since the solar sector is heavily relied upon in the U.S., it is very difficult for the U.S. economy to meet all of its solar power demand targets.
Solar Power Costs:
Solar Power’s cost to operate each system has been very high. With the U.S. reaching an 80-year high, it’s clear that it costs more per watt than any other power source on the planet. An estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that the total cost of solar power in 2010 was $44.6 billion. (See also EIA 2010 Solar Energy Report, p. 43.) The U.S. Solar Energy Society estimates that the U.S. PV industry currently receives a combined total of $11.9 billion ($28.9 billion worldwide), which represents roughly $9.4 billion per annum.
Another source of U.S. energy costs in comparison to the average for other countries? Well, the U.S. solar economy is quite competitive in terms of its overall competitiveness. In 2000, the U.S. solar industry produced more solar than for any other large country, but the industry grew by more than 20 percent between 2000 and 2012 (See United States Wind Investment Market, Table 1). The U.S. solar industry grew at twice the rate of the developed market as the developed market: roughly 20 percent in 2005; and only six percent in 2006.
Solar Power’s Cost vs. Renewable Electricity Market
Solar power is an energy form of energy storage. The energy that can go into the batteries in the solar cells used to charge the cells can be stored for about 10 years in the sun-free
If renewables are not an option for increased power production, we will have to use one of the five base-load generators already in use: coal, oil, nuclear, natural gas and hydroelectric. A breakdown of the amount of electricity each supplies and the cost of that electricity would be helpful at this point. Coal cost 2.07 cents per kilowatt hour and produced fifty percent of the electricity in the U.S. in 1999. Natural gas cost 3.52 cents and produced 16 percent. Oil cost 3.18 cents and produced 3 percent. Nuclear cost 1.83 cents and produced twenty percent. The cost for hydroelectric, which produced 9 percent, was not available (Loewen 53).
The question now is, which of the five is most viable both economically and environmentally? Hydroelectric has no emissions or solid waste so it is good for the environment, but it is also completely location specific. There are only a certain number of places where a hydroelectric dam can be built. If those places don’t coincide with where the demand for power is you can’t use it. Oil has a relatively high