Thread: nuclear plants
View Single Post
Old 09-25-2008, 05:34 PM   #29 (permalink)
Duffman
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 531
Thanks: 11
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
I am aware of heat plants, they are a great technology, they supply electricity during the summer peak load times of day. But they are only good in Desert regions with low latitudes around the equator, there are a garbage solution anywhere else.

Wave generation IMHO is currently a theoretical pipe dream technology. There is a multitude of offshore windfarms but diddly for tidal, I don’t know why but it just is that way.

Wind is good, but wind cant stand on its own, there is not a grid in the world with more than 20% wind supply (Germany and Denmark) and they have very real issues with reliability of supply and end up importing power from Nuclear Powered France (80%), plus their costs are significantly higher than those of France.

HVDC is very much real and a good technology. Doing what you propose is not without problems. First the infrastructure will be costly. Second when you generate your power away from where you use it you run the risk of interruption of supply. Do a search of the “Quebec Ice Storm”. When the power goes out for long periods of time, people can die after being overcome by nature.

Storage solutions are more garbage solutions. Cost rises dramatically, storage on the scale to supply millions of people is not realistic and efficiencies go into the toilet when converting energy.

I am not against using renewable energy, its a great supplement to Hydro and Thermal/Nuclear baseload but that is all it is and all it will ever be. Really these alternatives wont take off because they are very costly and ultimately when we flip the switch, if the power doesn’t come on it isn’t worth a dam.
  Reply With Quote