On the news there has been much hype on supposed "green" jobs and other advancements in energy-producing technology. The U.S only gets about 6% of our total energy from renewable fuels (manhattan-institute.org 2005) and our president is calling on corporate America to switch to green energy. Like everything in the world, there is a huge problem.
The problem is with our current "grid system". But let's slow down. What IS "the Grid"? In the U.S the "grid" supplies you with all of your energy needs. The grid is a shortened word for the National Power Grid. This is where the electricity goes when its on its way to your house. The National Power Grid is a system of transporting energy from the production sites to our homes, businesses, schools, etc.
There is no storing of energy, it is all (relatively) immediately converted into high voltages and sent off to run our lives. This creates a huge balancing act in the grid. There can't be too much electricity in the wires at one time and there can't be too little.
Do you see the problem?
Coal provides constant consistent production of power on an hourly basis. All you need to supply power with coal (in a sense) is a constant fire. But with solar power, problems erupt. If hundreds of new solar power plants went online today, or even over a period of five years, other coal power plants would have to be shut down the same second a solar plant came online (in order to supply residents with consistent power supply). With our current energy economy privatized, it would be illegal for the government to force coal power plants to shut down and give in to the solar competition. That goes for wind power too. But there indeed is an even larger problem with solar and wind farms in relation to the grid. They don't produce a constant consistent amount of power on an hourly basis. Electricity would be fairly aggravating and pointless if it could only be used when the sun was shining, or when the wind was blowing. Our current lifestyles could not allow for electricity during the day and blackouts at night. There are also different amounts of light during different times across America, and wind power would only work for certain areas of the country.
Solar and wind aren't impossible, but it would require cooperation that America has never seen. In the meantime Nuclear and renewable fuels do provide a constant consistent amount of power at an hourly rate. We just need a place to put the waste and a cheap crop to farm that isn't essential to our food supply. But as far as the "Solar" or "wind" solutions, we have a long way to go.
4 comments:
Duckta presents an interesting point: If the maintaining of the power grid necessitates a consistent supply of power, how can we get a large amount of new "green" power without forcing coal plants to shut down?
Still, the eventual scarcity of non-renewable energy is a problem that we will eventually be forced to confront. Solar and wind power are not where they need to be for mass use. Yet this problem needs to be solved.
One of the solutions Duckta presented was Nuclear power. While the n-word may inspire fear in some, it is not something to be so worried about. Nuclear power is clean and while it is technically non-renewable, we will not run out of nuclear fuel (uranium) in the near future. Nuclear power plants are highly efficient, produce large amounts of energy, are very reliable, and produces a diminutive amount of carbon emissions.
The major argument against Nuclear power centers around nuclear waste. Large amounts of effectively non- biodegradable waste is produced in every nuclear fission reaction. A solution to a large part of our nuclear waste problem is the recycling of plutonium (nuclear waste). Little do many know, plutonium can be recycled and reprocessed, a practice already in use in parts of Europe.
Nuclear power is a good, clean solution to a difficult problem. With the implementation of plutonium-recycling, America could have a relatively safe solution to their energy problem.
I personally agree with that, but then the question is: how can the American populace be educated on the safety of nuclear? Are we ready to invest the money to build the plants and will they be excepted? If no What are some alternatives that are possible?
Why not give the left over nuclear waste for chemo patients? NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR ALL THE WAY BABY... IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BE GREEN YOU GOT TO GO NUCLEAR! There just is so much energy produced compared to anything else we have, why can't we use a technology America developed?
The Videoist, I am unsure whether or not Nuclear waste can be used for chemo, but the waste to power ratio is incredible in nuclear energy. You are 100% right in saying that we should use technology created by Americans to power Americans, but there is a large education barrier on the subject in the U.S. How do you propose we get past it?
Post a Comment