Today: 18.Jun.2018

Gary Young, mechanical engineer, major product development manager - Before retirement, he worked on product development that significantly contributed to profitability of a global technology company: How do solar, wind, hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear compare for energy return on investment? What will happen if the United States does not continue with a second generation of nuclear power plants?

John Shanahan, civil engineer, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - USA: This is a simple, short comparison of wind, solar, fossil fuels and nuclear power. Two have extremely low energy density, require lots of materials, maintenance and tremendous volume of new parts every 20 to 30 years. They are also variable to non-existent sometimes and cause havoc with electrical energy grids for modern society. The other two are high to very high energy density and require much less land. The 2009 - 2017 White House, its Science Advisor, John Holdren, and Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton are strong proponents of wind and solar energy, want significant reductions in use of fossil fuels and did little to promote nuclear power for the future. Most of the rest of the elected officials in the White House and Congress from the mid 1970s through 2018 have done little to develop a national energy plan. There are programs for assisting Americans with health care and retirement, but no national energy plan, except to use what is the cheapest or what is popular with voters today.

Published in Several energy types

Tim Ball, environmental consultant and former professor of climatology at the University of Winnigeg: Ontario, a Province in Canada, a country with almost unlimited energy resources and the same population as California, has exorbitantly high electricity bills. So high, that people march in protest. How did this happen? It is hard to believe, but it is primarily the result of deliberate energy policies recommended by the UN to world leaders.

Mike Conley and Tim Maloney: This is an excellent detailed, easy to follow analysis of Stanford University Professor of Civil Engineering, Mark Jacobson's claim that the world can acquire all the electrical energy it needs from wind turbines and solar panels. In short, Jacobson's claim is not achievable and a waste of money and time. What are the most important roles of the sun? 1) Heat the planet to livable conditions, 2) Evaporate ocean water, 3) Cause plants to grow and be the basis of the food chain, 4) Cause wind to bring the evaporated ocean water over the land and drop it as rain and snow. Electricity from wind and solar besides being unreliable and unpredictable is extremely dilute. As the authors clearly point out, replacing worn out solar panels on Jacobson's grand scheme would require tremendous amounts of replacement parts every day and the Earth doesn't have easy access to all these materials. The authors point the way with nuclear. Good reading for everyone.

Published in Wind and Solar

Newsletter Subscription

  • Latest
  • Popular
  • Edgar Ocampo Tellez: El propĆ³sito de este…
  • Alexander Hellemans, IEEE Spectrum: As soon as…
  • Vaclav Smil, Czech-Canadian scientist and policy analyst.…
  • IEEE SPECTRUM, The Institute of Electrical and…
  • Nadine Freischlad, writer for Mongabay Series: In…
  • Edgar Ocampo Tellez: El propĆ³sito de este…