Wind or Nuclear?

Discussion in 'Energy' started by Skull Pilot, Jul 8, 2009.

  1. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,702
    Thanks Received:
    4,478
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,031
    Wind or Nuclear? - Ray Harvey - Mises Institute

    This is a good point even if it is semantics. even wind power is not "renewable" Once the wind has gone past a turbine, the energy is transferred to the turbine. that particular chunk of wind is gone not reused.

    here is the rub for environmentalists. Do you want more and more acreage used for wind and solar until as far as the eye can see not one square inch of open land is left or do you want the same energy producing, greenhouse gas free energy produced at smaller unobtrusive plants that can be built almost entirely underground?

    It seem counter intuitive to me to ignore the one energy resource that we own. We are the Saudi Arabia of coal and yet we demonize its use rather than investing in ways to make coal cleaner, we have decided to make energy from coal unaffordable.

    that last bit is part of the problem with wind and solar. we have to wait for the diluted energy to come to us. Here in New England, June has been one of the cloudiest on record in the last 50 years. Solar dependence would have left a lot of us in the dark. we do not live in a good wind corridor here so ant power produced by wind would have to be transported here at great expense. Or we could build small reactors to supply all the regional power we could ever want.
    subsidizing only adds to our costs. Not only do we pay higher prices for less efficient energy sources but our tax burden increases to subsidize these power sources.


    Again if reducing transmission distances of power is less expensive, why do we insist on putting all our energy needs on power that has to be transmitted over vast distances because it can only be produced in the most remote locations? Is it worth the trillions of dollars it will cost?

    And once again we see the hypocrisy of Pickens and his ilk. it's fine for him to have tax payer foot the bill for his projects as long as he get the profit and doesn't have to look at a windmill out of his living room window.

    I still don't understand this especially when you factor in the true amount of nuclear waste produced by a reactor and not the inflated quantity the alarmists say is produced.

    More bang for the buck but we still would rather spend our money on the most inefficient energy rather than the most efficient.

    I've posted articles that have said this very same thing about so called nuclear waste. once again our government doesn't allow the recycling or reuse of nuclear materials so rather than benefiting from nuclear, we would rather pursue less efficient but more expensive power sources.

    And I'll add that we'll all be flat out broke because we are pursuing the flat out wrong course on energy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  2. strollingbones
    Offline

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,613
    Thanks Received:
    15,616
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,915
    wind energy has its own set of problems and is not the solution for all areas....the northeast demands so much electricity that it buys it from canada...as does california....nuclear energy will meet the needs of more people than wind or solar...as far as enviroment...wind kills birds and bats...so you are back to solar or hydro generated electricity....since water is going to become the new oil....hydro is out..for much of the country...so you are back to solar or nuclear....solar could be the solutuion if they can come up with batteries that can store more electricity at a time..
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,470
    Thanks Received:
    5,415
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,312
    It is not a choice of wind or nuclear. The real choice is continueing on the same path as we are today, or all of the above for alternative energies, including nuclear. But in order to do any of this, we must completely rebuild our grid, and make it a distributed grid that can pick up energy from a 2 kw home solar installation as well as a 10 gw nuclear plant.

    Continueing the use of coal plants is not only about putting more GHGs into the atmosphere, it is also about putting more lead, mercury, and arsenic into our childrens bodys.
     
  4. PubliusInfinitum
    Offline

    PubliusInfinitum BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,805
    Thanks Received:
    725
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +726
    ROFLMNAO...

    Anyone that wants to see the results of designing a culture around 'no coal' and flaccid 'alternatives' such as wind and solar, need go no farther than the Socialist Democracy of C-A-L-I-F-O-R-N-I-A... The highly subsidized (which is not to say bankrupt) state of Delusion.

    California started on this nonsense WAY BACK, with a BIG Push in the 70s, another in the 80s and of course spent a fair chunk of the 90s in the DARK! Which of course was blamed on greed... and decidedly NOT the idiocy of chasing energy production out of the state for 30 years.

    Had the US built a network of Nuclear power plants to handle the electrical load, we'd be well on our way to energy independence right now. Who knows what alternatives would exist today, if the left had not shit the bed and essentially stopped the development of nuclear energy.

    Id wager that we'd have a nuclear power train engine, which powered miles and miles of cargo from east to west, north to south... and while the diesels are highly efficient... I doubt that few could argue that the nuclear train wouldn't be more so and that the diesel presently being consumed by trains wouldn't be useful in the stores used to operate the nations trucks.

    Wind and Solar are a distraction and an energy novelty... Solar will only come to a reasonable value when Science finds the biological code to unlock it's natural potential to synthesize biological reactions of systems which serves efficiencies, well beyond our present means to capture and manipulate.

    Of course nature has been working on it for a billion years and at present has only developed solar powered propulsion systems, such as that which is typing this message and these systems require the need to consume other solar driven biologics for additional energy stores.

    The problem that we're facing is what it always is... and that is the intellectual means of the common leftist is simply insufficient to comprehend the problem, thus their means to find a solution is non-existant... yet here we are discussing 'Leftist solutions' as if they're even RELEVANT...

    And as long as the problem is tasked with finding a solution... the problem will only get worse and the solution will always remain, right there... the enormous elephant in the room, that nobody wants to see...

    Nothing particularly complicated really... just ignore the Left and solve the problem.

    Nuclear for Electricty and the rest sorts itself out fairly qucikly.

    The problem is, of course; that the Left itself is preventing Nuclear development; which brings us back to that pesky elephant...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWzy9mUxVPI]YouTube - Is Nuclear Power Worth the Environmental Cost?[/ame]

    Adm. Bowman makes a much better case on this issue than I ever could in regards to the myths associated and often put up by various environmental groups. Wind,Solar, other so called eco-friendly technologies while viable solutions for small, and off-peak, and filler energy needs. They should never be seen as a overall energy solution. Fossil fuels are not going away anytime soon and the poster was very correct in his comment on coal as it applies to the US stockpiles. The US should it put efforts to use that coal in a clean manner along with the construction of nuclear power plants. as well as wind and solar and other technologies along with developing our own natural resources , our energy needs would be met for year to come. There are many benefits in developing this sort of plan not the least of which would be ending our nation being held hostage by middle eastern oil barons. Those that oppose US involvement in regions that claim the US is there to protect it's oil interests should be the loudest champions for develping domestic production as well as those energy resources I spoke about rather than supporting a movement that has a very narrow focus and a limited view based on an earth first touchy feely mentality. This sort of view will never end our dependence on foreign oil, rather it will keep this nation hostage to OPEC for many years to come. Why you ask? because there are simply some technologies that will not run on anything but fossil fuels, i.e. aviation. That is of course your willing to conceed the development of the nuclear jet engine of the 60's again, however I don't think the greenies would like that one too much.
     
  6. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,470
    Thanks Received:
    5,415
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,312
    There are no clean coal plants in the US that even in construction. The only one that I know of that is being built now is in China. Clean coal is a myth.

    Wind is now producing in the giga-watt range in Oregon alone. Solar, as it becomes very cheap, will be a huge producer. Consider all the industrial and commercial roofs that are available. Geo-thermal has immense potential as well, at less cost than nuclear.

    In the next five years I think there will be enough proof for all but the most ideologically driven that we have created a catastrophe. Global warming, and the climate change that it is causing is a reality.
     
  7. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    What kind of energy do they use to create solar panels and wind turbines ?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Currently, the largest wind farm in the US – and the largest in the world – is Florida Power & Light's Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center, located in Taylor County, Texas. The Horse Hollow project operates 421 wind turbines and has a capacity of 735 megawatts

    Rocks did you know that the entire capacity of wind in the Untied States is enough to serve 4.5 million homes just about equal to that of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station here in Arizona that serves Approx. 4 million. So while wind has it's place in an overall solution , nuclear would seem to be a much better solution in terms of power generation, jobs, and long term power generation.
     
  9. Midnight Marauder
    Offline

    Midnight Marauder BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12,404
    Thanks Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    Lighting's dirty little secret: The swirly florescent bulbs that will by law be required, as incandescent bulbs are banned? Mercury. Where's it all gonna go, from the billions of these discarded? Into the groundwater! Love it!

    Wind power's dirty little secret: It takes 4 barrels of oil per year, per wind turbine, for the gearbox. And another five barrels for the transformer below each turbine. And these turbines leak and sling this oil. Great for the groundwater!

    Multiply those figures times a million, two million wind turbines planned -- and you see why oil magnates like Pickens are pushing this. They stand to sell millions of barrels of oil!

    Dirty little secret of solar: The production of solar panels involves nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) emissions be released. NF3 is about 17,000 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. The concentration of it in the atmosphere has increased 20 fold during the last two decades by its use in manufacturing processes. The level is increasing 11 percent per year.

    The weaker CO2 stays in the atmosphere up to 100 years. NF3 stays in the atmosphere for 700 years or more.

    Dirty little secret of Hydrogen: Water Vapor is the product of combustion. Sounds great, right? But -- Water vapor is far and away the #1 greenhouse gas. This according to the IPCC and every other scientist on both sides of the issue. It's the one thing they do ALL agree on. Hmmm...

    Dirty little secrets of Ethanol: Yeah, it's "cleaner" if you believe CO2 is really really bad, because it does produce less when combusted. But it also produces the definite pollutant and definite poison to all living things -- CO (Carbon Monoxide) 100 times more than gasoline! Also, it takes 1,200 gallons of water to make a gallon of this crap!

    Cleaner little secret of gasoline powered internal combustion: Today's engines put out 95% fewer emissions than their 1970 counterparts!

    It's what they DON'T tell us that really winds up hurting the environment in the long haul.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  10. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,752
    Thanks Received:
    6,618
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,085
    most nuke plants are stopped from being built by the LOCALS...within the area it is proposed to be built, NOT by environmentalists....NIMBY Not In My Back Yard syndrome!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page