Re: Can Nuclear Power Deliver?


LongmuirG wrote:

> Citizen wrote:
> > That seems to be the current mainstream thinking. The future energy
> > system will have many sources of energy to feed it and use many
> > carriers to convert this energy into services.
>
> That may be mainstream thinking among certain enviroweenies, but it
> does not make a lot of sense.
>
> Human beings currently use only 3 major energy sources (fossil, hydro,
> nuclear) -- 5 if we split fossil into oil, coal, gas.

Or, by 2010, six if you add wind. In some countries, this is more
important that oil or hydro for electricity generation.

About the only
> market where those energy sources compete is in electric generation,
> where hydro, nuclear, coal & gas all supply part of the demand. Even
> there, gas is mainly used for short-duration peaking demand.

Not in the UK. Gas provides 40% of electricity.

If we
> look at transportation, oil is the almost universal fuel of choice --
> whether we are talking airplanes, ships, or trucks.
>
Not for trains. Electricity is preferred. With small advances in
battery costs it could be for cars too).

> For each energy use, there is a "most efficient" energy source --
> however we humans choose to define efficiency. It is good conservation
> to make the maximum use of the most efficient source.

Do you mean cheapest or most efficient? The former is more important,
and in this case suppkly elasticity determines this is not the case. If
Gas were the cheapest, everyone would use gas, the price of gas would
rise, and it would no longer be the cheapest.

It's no accident that the long run costs of nuclear, gas, coal, wind
electricity are all in a similar range.

That is why
> humans will continue to rely on only a handful of energy sources for
> most of their energy demand.

For the reasons above, that is not the case, barring some miracle
breakthrough like cold fusion. This is actually what the nuclear
pioneers in the 50s thought (too cheap to meter!). If innovations in
nuclear fission bought the generating cost down to 1.5c per KWhr, gas,
oila and coal prices would fall to compete.

All the enviro-blather about multiple
> "green" energy sources is just a cover for the politically
> well-connected to get their hands on taxes paid by ordinary people. It
> is surprising that you have fallen for the scam.

Actually, they're a reflection of resource availability.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: En Nahud, Sudan yesterday
    ... A gas engine is stronger than an electric. ... Fuel cell technology is 60 percent efficient, meaning the energy ... electricity, the electricity is used for running an electric motor. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: segway- whatever happened to it
    ... way cheaper per joule than the common fuels (gas, diesel, propane, CNG). ... electricity generated by wind, direct solar, or nukes. ... With most of the energy coming from the same process, ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: interesting article on nuclear
    ... There is a subsection about nuclear ... moving to a sustainable and largely carbon-free energy future. ... This requires a reliable supply of electricity which cannot be readily ... providing clean baseload power. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • The Need for Nuclear Power
    ... The Need for Nuclear Power ... Energy multiplies human labor, increasing productivity. ... one third two billion people lack even electricity. ...
    (soc.culture.indian)
  • @@ A Parsi (Dr. Homi Jehangir Bhabha) established Indias nuclear program @@
    ... president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research ... believes that even if India gets everything it wants under the US-India ... civilian nuclear agreement signed by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister ... it would still be only a tiny fraction of the oil and gas ...
    (soc.culture.iranian)
Loading