Comparisons of various energy
sources
As the world's population increases and there is continued comparison to
the current western European, Japanese, and North American living standards, there is
likely to be demand for more electrical power. Energy sources available in the world
include coal, nuclear, hydroelectric, gas, wind, solar, refuse-based, and biomass. In
addition, fusion had been originally proposed as the long-term source.
Every form of energy generation has advantages and disadvantages as
shown in the table below.
Source |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Coal |
- Inexpensive
- Easy to recover (in U.S. and Russia)
- Used for base load
|
- Requires expensive air pollution controls (e.g. mercury, sulfur dioxide)
- Significant contributor to acid rain and carbon dioxide
- Major pollutants - NOx SO2,
Particulates, Ozone, Marcury
- Requires extensive transportation system
- Ash ponds needed to store bottom ash and flyash
- Flyash contains heavy metals
- Stack gases release higher levels of radioactivity than
nuclear plants during normal operation
- Many deaths incurred during the mining of coal
|
Nuclear |
- Fuel is inexpensive
- Energy generation is the most concentrated source
- Waste is more compact than any source
- Extensive scientific basis for the cycle
- Easy to transport as new fuel
- No greenhouse or acid rain effects
- Used for base load
|
- Requires larger capital cost because of emergency, containment,
radioactive waste and storage systems
- Requires resolution of the long-term high level waste storage issue in
most countries
- Potential nuclear proliferation issue
- Accidents can result in major releases of I131
, Cs137, other radioactive products as at Fukushima and
Chernobyl
|
Hydroelectric |
- Very inexpensive once dam is built
- Government has invested heavily in building dams, particularly in the
Western U.S.
|
- Very expensive to build
- Very limited source since depends on water elevation
- Many dams available currently exist (not much of a future source[depends on country])
- Dam collapse usually leads to loss of life
- Dams have affected fish (e.g. salmon runs)
- Environmental damage for areas flooded (backed up) and downstream
- Variable source, depends on amount of rain and snow
pack
|
Gas / Oil |
- Good distribution system for current use levels
- Easy to obtain
- Better as space heating energy source
|
- Very limited availability as shown by shortages during winters several
years ago
- Could be major contributor to global warming, 1/3 less
than coal
- Expensive for energy generation
- Large price swings with supply and demand
|
Wind |
- Wind is free if available
- Good source for periodic water pumping demands of farms as used earlier
in 1900's
- Generation and maintenance costs have decreased. Wind
is proving to be a reasonable cost renewable source.
- Well suited to rural areas.
|
- Need 3x the amount of installed generation to meet demand
- Limited to windy areas.
- Limited to small generator size (currently 2MW typical
max); need many towers.
- Need expensive energy storage (e.g. batteries or pumped
storage)
- Highly climate dependent - wind can damage equipment during windstorms or not turn
during still summer days.
- Can affect endangered birds, however tower design can
reduce impact.
- Major negative impact is on birds and bats
- Variable source
- Visual impact attributed to reduce property values
- Have been known to cause whale beaching (Newsweek April
4, 2011)
|
Solar |
- Sunlight is free when available
|
- Limited to southern areas of U.S. and other sunny areas
throughout the world (demand can be highest when least available, e.g
winter solar heating)
- Does require special materials for mirrors/panels that can affect
environment
- Current technology requires large amounts of land for small amounts of
energy generation
- Very expensive
|
Biomass |
- Industry in its infancy
- Could create jobs because smaller plants would be used
|
- Inefficient if small plants are used
- Could be significant contributor to global warming because fuel has low
heat content
- Can be useful for home heating (e.g. corn, grains)
|
Refuse Based Fuel |
- Fuel can have low cost
- Could create jobs because smaller plants would be used
- Low sulfur dioxide emissions
|
- Inefficient if small plants are used
- Could be significant contributor to global warming because fuel has low
heat content
- Flyash can contain metals as cadmium and lead
- Contain dioxins and furans in air and ash releases
- Gas must be used to improve combustion
|
Hydrogen |
- Combines easily with oxygen to produce water and energy
|
- Very costly to produce
- Takes more energy to produce hydrogen then energy that
could be recovered.
|
Fusion |
- Hydrogen and tritium could be used as fuel source
- Higher energy output per unit mass than fission
- Low radiation levels associated with process than fission-based reactors
|
- Breakeven point has not been reached after ~40 years of expensive
research and commercially available plants not expected for at least 35 years.
|
Conclusion:
Throughout the world, we need every energy source we can get
- including nuclear. As one can see from the table above, all
energy sources have BOTH advantages AND disadvantages. Nuclear has a number
of advantages that warrant its use as one of the many methods of supplying an
energy-demanding world. Even with conservation efforts, energy demand has been and will
continue to increase. Other factors can accelerate that increase, e.g. the proposed shift
to electric cars to meet environmental air quality goals. In using each and every
one of these forms of energy production, we need to make sure we conserve as much
as we can so we leave sources for future generations. Energy suppliers need to ensure that
they do not contribute to short and long-term environmental problems. Governments need to
ensure energy is generated safely to that neither people nor the environment are harmed.
In the United States, many of the existing nuclear plants will reach the
end of their currently authorized U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission license during the
next 25 years. If nuclear is not used, other energy sources must be obtained.
Additional insights into reasons for considering nuclear power as part
of the energy supply mix are outlined in
Reasons for Using
Nuclear Power As An Energy Source.
Information Resources:
A good perspective of future energy demands and environmental impacts is
provided by the following Energy Information
Administration reports:
Nuclear Fuel Cycle Calculators
The World Information Service
on Energy Uranium Project had numerous uranium fuel cycle-related pages (covering
Radiation and Health, Uranium Mining and Milling, Statistical Data · Current
Issues · Impacts · Tailings Management · Further Information, Uranium Enrichment,
Military Use of Depleted Uranium Phosphate Tailings).
Questions to Raise and Address:
There is a perception that there is a vast supply of natural gas; this
source is being promoted as a way to meet air quality objectives by some government
agencies. If gas is to be used, several questions or issues need to be addressed:
- Why, during recent years, have natural gas and LP gas prices increased
substantially (even up to a factor of 2x)? Will the increased demand for gas by utilities
drive prices up further?
- Natural gas is ~ 95% efficient for home heating, but only 33 to 60 % when
used in gas boilers or turbines to generate electricity. Why should lower efficiency
applications be used?
- Can the gas transmission infrastructure handle the increased gas demand
without greatly reducing the amount available for residential home heating?
- Gas heating releases carbon dioxide to the air. Will this increase global
warming?
Other questions to address are:
- Is use of Electrical powered cars which depend on charging from a process
that is 33-60% efficient really a prudent use of energy?
- Will coal costs increase based on recent Environmental Protection Agency
air quality regulation changes?
- Will electrical deregulation really result in lower prices?
- If nuclear is not used, where is the electrical power to come from; how
much of a cost increase is the customer willing to pay? how much environmental impact will
the public tolerate?
These are the questions that should be answered by federal legislators
and state utility regulatory agencies. If you want to query your federal legislator, click
the appropriate link-
Representative -
Senator.
In some cases it has been stated that nuclear has benefited from
government subsidies during the early development. That is true. However, that does not
mean we should throw away the investment. In fact, many governments have invested heavily
in the capital infrastructure for making use of all energy sources. As an example,
electricity costs in the Tennessee Valley and Pacific Northwest are lower because of
previous government subsidizes of hydroelectric power - through the building of the dams
and the support of the Tennessee Valley Authority and Bonneville Power Administration.
Solar, coal, and wind programs have also received government funding. In general, the
United States government has promoted inexpensive energy by taxing energy use at lower
rates than in a number of other countries.
Renewables and Conservation Issues
To ensure that energy resources will be available for future
generations, we need to take actions in the following areas:
- improve home and building designs to conserve energy and take advantage
of passive renewable resources
- conduct research to ultimately lead to significant cost reductions for
renewable energy sources
- design industrial parks for those energy-intensive industries that take
advantage of cogeneration concepts
- ensure that power plants use cogeneration methods to minimize waste heat
- develop uses for nuclear waste products
- significantly reduce use of those energy production methods that are
major contributors to global warming, or develop technical solutions that curb releases of
those materials that produce global warming
Key WWW sites providing information on renewables include:
Copyright © 1996-2018The Virtual Nuclear
Tourist. All rights reserved. Revised:
Monday August 20, 2018