We are bombarded with all the information about alternative power from solar, wind and anything you can imagine. I ran into a very interesting piece on the subject of "density" required per KWH of alternative electricity last week in the Wall Street Journal. Going "green" has an offset cost in density not many of the experts are talking about. Here are some density factors for your consideration:
- Bio fuels 0.05 watts of energy per square meter
- Small Natural gas well 28 watts per square meter
- Wind turbines 1.0 watts per square meter
Solution for this would be to get serious about Nuclear Power. In all the history of Nuclear Power the amount of high level waste comes to 62,000 tons of high level waste products. Stacked to a depth of 20 feet it would cover an area the size on one football field. France produces about 80% of their electricity from Nuclear Power.
The picture in this post is a photo of the San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station in San Diego County. It has been there since the late 1960's with the original reactor, SONGS #1, shut down in the early 1990's but reactors two an three are still on line and not scheduled for decommissioning until 2022. It was built to withstand a 7.0 magnitude seismic event directly under the plant and still survive. The people in the photo look pretty relaxed about the proximity of the Nuke Plant next to their beach.
Note: The WSJ article was titled Small Is Beautiful - So Go Nuclear by Robert Bryce a senior fellow at Manhattan Institute and was adapted from the Winter 2012 edition of City Journal. The photo is San Onofre State Beach Park located just south of San Clemete, Ca. and right next to SONGS run by So. Cal. Edison.
There is so much symbolism in this picture. I had better reserve comment.
ReplyDeleteAll of the political smoke and mirrors on alternative energy like solar and wind does not take into account the affordability for consumers when you remove the subsidies. Nuclear and to a lesser extent Natural Gas are energy sources that are plentiful in this country.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, we have not factored in the cost of all the conflicts and loss of lives, treasure along with the very high costs of maintaining our armed forces that act as a policeman for the world oil supplies since the early 1950's when Eisenhower toppled a duly elected government of Iraq and installed Saddam Hussein. We need to get away from our dependency on oil and we have to do it in a way that is financially sustainable for consumers. Right now Nuclear and Natural Gas offer that opportunity.
Cheap energy has brought us prosperity and expensive energy is making us a 3rd rate nation. Some other factors of course but the money expended protecting the oil lanes by our military could be put to much more productive use. We have the Natural Gas, we probably have the oil if it wasn't tied up by the enviormental people. Nuclear has a public relations problem but with careful use is the cheapest. Natural Gas for transportation will be an important shift if some people would get out of the way. It would be nice if our cities countys and states would lead the way by gradually converting their vehicles to use natural gas.
ReplyDelete$1.66 current price here in the valley
Nuclear has a public relations problem.....According to this article the San Onofre plant is leaking. http://news.yahoo.com/small-radiation-amount-could-escaped-plant-192144016.html Yet,it's power per acre compared to other choices is hard to beat.
ReplyDeleteWe learned this past week the San Onofre Nuke plant has developed some leaking steam generator tubes. The leaking tubes are fairly new and were put into service in 2010. In any event, the leaking tubes have forced a shutdown.
ReplyDeleteI was pro-nuclear until the incident in Japan last year. I always thought that if anyone could do nuclear right, it would be the Japanese. Now I'm on the fence. I think our best path could be natural gas. It's cheap, we control the supply, pollutes less than coal and less environmental impact than hydro.
ReplyDelete