Alternate Energy Sources

Details: Written by: Glenn and Rick; Category: Alternate Energy Sources; Hits: 136

Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution- a six year old article but still very relevant, Yale Environment 360 Richard Rhodes • July 19, 2018 Many environmentalists have opposed nuclear power, citing its dangers and the difficulty of disposing of its radioactive waste. But a Pulitzer Prize-winning author argues that nuclear is safer than most energy sources and is needed if the world hopes to radically decrease its carbon emissions.In the late 16th century, when the increasing cost of firewood forced ordinary Londoners to switch reluctantly to coal, Elizabethan preachers railed against a fuel they believed to be, literally, the Devil’s excrement. Coal was black, after all, dirty, found in layers underground — down toward Hell at the center of the earth — and smelled strongly of sulfur when it burned. Switching to coal, in houses that usually lacked chimneys, was difficult enough; the clergy’s outspoken condemnation, while certainly justified environmentally, further complicated and delayed the timely resolution of an urgent problem in energy supply.

For too many environmentalists concerned with global warming, nuclear energy is today’s Devil’s excrement. They condemn it for its production and use of radioactive fuels and for the supposed problem of disposing of its waste. In my judgment, their condemnation of this efficient, low-carbon source of baseload energy is misplaced. Far from being the Devil’s excrement, nuclear power can be, and should be, one major component of our rescue from a hotter, more meteorologically destructive world. Like all energy sources, nuclear power has advantages and disadvantages. What are nuclear power’s benefits? First and foremost, since it produces energy via nuclear fission rather than chemical burning, it generates baseload electricity with no output of carbon, the villainous element of global warming. Switching from coal to natural gas is a step toward decarbonizing, since burning natural gas produces about half the carbon dioxide of burning coal. But switching from coal to nuclear power is radically decarbonizing, since nuclear power plants release greenhouse gases only from the ancillary use of fossil fuels during their construction, mining, fuel processing, maintenance, and decommissioning — about as much as solar power does, which is about 4 to 5 percent as much as a natural gas-fired power plant. Nuclear power releases less radiation into the environment than any other major energy source. Second, nuclear power plants operate at much higher capacity factors than renewable energy sources or fossil fuels. Capacity factor is a measure of what percentage of the time a power plant actually produces energy. It’s a problem for all intermittent energy sources. The sun doesn’t always shine, nor the wind always blow, nor water always fall through the turbines of a dam.

In the United States in 2016, nuclear power plants, which generated almost 20 percent of U.S. electricity, had an average capacity factor of 92.3 percent, meaning they operated at full power on 336 out of 365 days per year. (The other 29 days they were taken off the grid for maintenance.) In contrast, U.S. hydroelectric systems delivered power 38.2 percent of the time (138 days per year), wind turbines 34.5 percent of the time (127 days per year) and solar electricity arrays only 25.1 percent of the time (92 days per year). Even plants powered with coal or natural gas only generate electricity about half the time for reasons such as fuel costs and seasonal and nocturnal variations in demand. Nuclear is a clear winner on reliability.

Third, nuclear power releases less radiation into the environment than any other major energy source.......read on https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-nuclear-power-must-be-part-of-the-energy-solution-environmentalists-climate ......AND...... What are Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)? Small modular reactors (SMRs) are advanced nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of up to 300 MW(e) per unit, which is about one-third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear power reactors. SMRs, which can produce a large amount of low-carbon electricity, are:

Small – physically a fraction of the size of a conventional nuclear power reactor.
Modular – making it possible for systems and components to be factory-assembled and transported as a unit to a location for installation.
Reactors – harnessing nuclear fission to generate heat to produce energy. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-reactors-smrs

Learn more about nuclear fission and energy.

Details: Written by: Glenn and Rick; Category: Alternate Energy Sources; Hits: 192

The future is floating solar........As the world races to cut emissions and meet goals such as the European Union’s net-zero carbon plan for 2050, floating solar photovoltaic projects will offer a big contribution, particularly in countries that don’t have a lot of open land or where solar plants compete with agricultural land. “This floating tech development opens the doors for countries with land constraints to boost their sustainability goals,” says Valentina Puccini, a senior energy specialist at the European Investment Bank who quit a job in oil and gas nearly 20 years ago to work in renewable energy. “There aren’t so many floating solar parks in Europe just yet, but we’re starting to see some nice projects around the continent.” Floating solar parks rest on large platforms held in place with cables attached to the beds of seas, lakes or reservoirs. The panels are coated to prevent rust. According to a Nature study, covering 30% of the surface of the world’s 115 000 reservoirs with solar power could generate 9 434 terawatt hours of electricity annually. That’s more than triple the energy production of the European Union.

Floating projects the European Investment Bank is exploring include one on artificial reservoirs in North Macedonia and a large floating solar farm in the Haute-Marne region of northern France. The French project will supply power to about 26 000 people.As the world races to cut emissions and meet goals such as the European Union’s net-zero carbon plan for 2050, floating solar photovoltaic projects will offer a big contribution, particularly in countries that don’t have a lot of open land or where solar plants compete with agricultural land. “This floating tech development opens the doors for countries with land constraints to boost their sustainability goals,” says Valentina Puccini, a senior energy specialist at the European Investment Bank who quit a job in oil and gas nearly 20 years ago to work in renewable energy. “There aren’t so many floating solar parks in Europe just yet, but we’re starting to see some nice projects around the continent.”
Floating solar parks rest on large platforms held in place with cables attached to the beds of seas, lakes or reservoirs. The panels are coated to prevent rust. According to a Nature study, covering 30% of the surface of the world’s 115 000 reservoirs with solar power could generate 9 434 terawatt hours of electricity annually. That’s more than triple the energy production of the European Union.

Floating projects the European Investment Bank is exploring include one on artificial reservoirs in North Macedonia and a large floating solar farm in the Haute-Marne region of northern France. The French project will supply power to about 26 000 people.Read......watch the slideshow https://www.eib.org/en/essays/solar-power-energy-future-roofs-floating-renewable

Details: Written by: Glenn and Rick; Category: Alternate Energy Sources; Hits: 169

Recapturing excess heat could power most of Europe, say experts. Preventing heat waste largely being ignored as solution to energy crisis, say environmental campaigners. Guardian Anna Turns Thu 23 Feb 2023 Excess heat produced across Europe could almost power the entire region but preventing this waste is largely being ignored as a solution to the energy crisis, say environmental experts. “The global energy crisis is a wakeup call to stop wasting energy,” said Toby Morgan, senior manager for the built environment at Climate Group, an environmental not-for-profit. “Now, more than ever, we need to make better use of the energy we already produce, we simply can’t afford to let it literally escape out the window. Energy efficiency improvements, like capturing and recycling excess heat, are absolutely critical to lower fossil fuel demand and lower bills.” A report published this week by the global engineering company Danfoss estimated that in the EU alone, excess heat was equal to 2,860 TWh a year, almost the same as the EU’s total energy demand for heat and hot water. Surplus heat is released into the air from a wide range of sources, including supermarkets, transport networks, data centres and commercial buildings. Much of this can be captured and used via existing heat recovery technologies, such as heat pumps, plus more efficient air conditioners and manufacturing machinery according to the authors of the report. Other solutions include improved urban planning and district energy systems based on networks of renewable energy supplies for both heating and cooling.

Brian Vad Mathiesen, a professor in energy planning and renewable energy systems at Aalborg University, led the research cited in the report that builds on his team’s previous Heat Roadmap Europe projects. “The amount of cities, regions and countries in Europe which waste heat while spending billions on natural gas or electric heating is mind-blowing,” said Vad Mathiesen, warning that Europe’s energy security was at stake. “Take the Netherlands – there is virtually no district heating even though there is almost twice the amount of waste heat compared to the heat demand. Denmark is the same size but has towards 60% percent district heating with only one third of the population. The use of waste heat is certainly not connected to technical differences. While the physical laws are the same, the political will and traditions are very different.”

There was “huge, unharnessed potential” to the excess heat produced by heavy industry, such as chemical manufacturing, steel and cement production. A report published this week by the global engineering company Danfoss estimated that in the EU alone, excess heat was equal to 2,860 TWh a year, almost the same as the EU’s total energy demand for heat and hot water. In 2020, European data centres consumed about 3.5% of the region’s electricity demand, according to ReUseHeat, an EU project that explored barriers to urban heat recovery. The report highlights that the UK has an abundance of excess energy, including from 456 data centres. “That’s third most in the world, just behind Germany and the US,” explains Kim Fausing, the president and chief executive of Danfoss, who believes recycling heat is a crucial step towards a green transition.

“If businesses were to harness all the excess heat from these centres, the emissions savings and revenue from selling this heat would be highly significant......read on https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/23/recapturing-excess-heat-could-power-most-of-europe-say-experts

Details: Written by: Glenn and Rick; Category: Alternate Energy Sources; Hits: 341

Nuclear Power vs. Coal: Three Reasons Why only One Will Power the next DecadeCarbon Credits Jennefer L September 26, 2024 Global power generation is evolving.......With an increasing number of renewable energy sources being harnessed, right now, nuclear power is catching the most attention in the move to cleaner energy.The International Energy Agency estimates that global nuclear generation will be 10% higher in 2025 than it was in 2023. By 2026, nearly half of the world’s electricity will come from low-emission sources, including nuclear.

The United States operates 93 commercial nuclear reactors that collectively produce approximately 780 billion kilowatt-hours (TWh) of electricity, which is a substantial amount of energy.
This output is sufficient to power more than 72 million homes and represents nearly 47% of the nation’s total electricity generation, according to the U.S. Office of Nuclear Energy. Yet, as you can see in the infographic, the US is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels. In 2023, coal made up about 8.7% of total energy consumption and 18.6% of electricity production. And there are approximately 210 coal plants running across the country right now.

Each coal plant pumps out about 3.2 terawatt-hours (TWh) of energy—enough to power roughly 306,000 homes.

Still, it’s important to note that coal plants also generate a ton of waste. Each plant releases around 333,000 tonnes of waste yearly, contributing to a total of 70 million tonnes of coal waste. And 60-70% of that? It’s fly ash—a harmful byproduct that contains heavy metals such as arsenic, lead and mercury. It’s highly toxic, harmful to ecosystems, and can contaminate soil and water while contributing adversely to climate change.Though 62% of the coal ash was recycled in 2022, the leftover coal waste still far outweighs what nuclear plants produce. 1. Nuclear Power is Cleaner......Nuclear power emits 40 times less carbon than coal. It has powered the U.S. for over 60 years, and with 93 reactors, the country has the largest nuclear fleet in the world. More importantly, the entire sector only generates about 2,000 tonnes of waste per year amounting to about 37.7 tonnes per plant. Compare that to coal, nuclear power is far superior as one of the cleanest energy sources available. 2. Nuclear Power is Cheaper (And More Reliable).......Not only is nuclear energy cleaner, but it’s also cheaper. nuclear energy costs much less to produce than coal or gas. For example, in the U.S., generating power with coal costs between $75.1 – $96.3 per megawatt-hour (MWh), while nuclear only costs $43.9/MWh......read on https://carboncredits.com/nuclear-power-vs-coal-three-reasons-why-only-one-will-power-the-next-decade/?utm_source=CarbonCredits.com&utm_campaign=48ebb48e3b-EMAIL_nuclear_infographic_09_2024&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-48ebb48e3b-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

Details: Written by: Glenn and Rick; Category: Alternate Energy Sources; Hits: 188

Every building sits on a thermal asset’: how networked geothermal power could change cities. The ground is humming with geothermal energy that could heat or cool our homes – and now the big US utilities are starting to take note Guardian Matt Simon 9 August 2902 Along with earthworms, rocks, and the occasional skeleton, there is a massive battery right under your feet. Unlike a flammable lithium ion battery, though, this one is perfectly stable, free to use, and ripe for sustainable exploitation: the Earth itself. While temperatures above ground fluctuate throughout the year, the ground stays a stable temperature, meaning that it is humming with geothermal energy that engineers can exploit. “Every building sits on a thermal asset,” said Cameron Best, director of business development at Brightcore Energy in New York, which deploys geothermal systems. “I really don’t think there’s any more efficient or better way to heat and cool our homes.”And now the big utilities are beginning to take a good hard look at that system. A couple of months ago Eversource Energy commissionedthe US’s first networked geothermal neighbourhood operated by a utility, in Framingham, Massachusetts. Pipes run down boreholes 600-700ft (about 180-215 metres) deep, where the temperature of the rock is consistently 55F (13C). A mixture of water and propylene glycol (a food additive that works here as an antifreeze) pumps through the piping, absorbing that geothermal energy, then flows to 31 residential and five commercial buildings, where fully electric heat pumps use the liquid to either heat or cool a space.

If deployed across the country, these geothermal systems could go a long way in helping decarbonise buildings, which are responsible for about a third of total greenhouse gas emissions in the US.Once a system is in place, buildings can draw heat from water pumped from below their foundations, instead of burning natural gas piped in from afar. Utilities use the same equipment to deploy networked geothermal as they do for gas lines, and even the same kind of pipes – they are just circulating fluid instead of gas. The networks don’t need special geology to operate, so they can be set up almost anywhere. The project in Framingham, then, could be the start of something big. To scale up, a geothermal loop such as Framingham’s might connect to an adjacent neighbourhood, and that one to another. “In the end, what we would like is if the gas utilities become thermal utilities,” said Audrey Schulman, executive director of the nonprofit climate-solutions incubator HEETlabs (a spin-off of the climate nonprofit HEET, which began pitching the idea to Eversource and other utilities in 2017). “Each individual, shared loop can be interconnected, like Lego blocks, to grow bigger and bigger.”.....READ ON https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/09/every-building-sits-on-a-thermal-asset-how-networked-geothermal-power-could-change-cities

Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution

The uture is Floating Solar..

Excess Heat Produced across Europe could almost Power the Entire Region but Preventing this Waste is largely Being Ignored

Nuclear Power vs. Coal: Three Reasons Why only One Will Power the next Decade

Every Building Sits on a thermal Asset’: how Networked Geothermal power could Change Cities.

More Articles …

User Menu