Comments for Solar Water Heater http://solar-investment.us Solar energy - Green future Tue, 22 May 2012 03:17:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 Comment on What are the ways that Solar Energy is more environment-friendly and feasible than Nuclear Energy? by golgafrincham http://solar-investment.us/what-are-the-ways-that-solar-energy-is-more-environment-friendly-and-feasible-than-nuclear-energy-3/comment-page-1/#comment-27739 golgafrincham Tue, 22 May 2012 03:17:27 +0000 http://solar-investment.us/what-are-the-ways-that-solar-energy-is-more-environment-friendly-and-feasible-than-nuclear-energy-3/#comment-27739 Solar: - can be produced locally and at scales appropriate to need/use --- removes inefficiency of transmission --- reduces cost of infrastructure --- reduces impact of infrastructure --- reduces security risks --- facilities can be added to existing structures - multiple ways to create energy (PV, steam, chimney effect) - can be used to create forms of energy other than electricity, such as: --- heat, motion, or used directly as light --- removes inefficiency of multiple conversions - in the case of large scale solar facilities, a decommissioned plant can usually be converted back to cropland, habitat, urban use, or any use almost immediately - a catastrophe at a large scale solar facility would be reason to evacuate no more than the most local community (this has happened in a oil-based solar trough plant) Nuclear: - from design to decommissioning, including mining and refinement, nuclear power produces about 75% as much carbon dioxide as fossil fuels - nuclear power currently is only developed in HUGE plants, thus concentrating power production, so it is only feasible near large population centers, presents a national security risk (as well as risks of wastes mentioned by others) - nuclear can only be used to create electricity, which requires transmission infrastructure to point of use, which is costly to build and maintain - nuclear power must heat water, which is used to turn turbines, which generate electricity -- so nuclear energy must be converted three times to become electricity, and there is a loss of efficiency at each stage - nuclear fuel requires large amounts of mining at multiple stages: --- intense cement and steel production for construction, both industries of which are huge carbon emitters --- large amounts of uranium mining to produce enough ore to be refined into fuel --- large amounts of petrol must be extracted to fuel the mining and transportation equipment/vehicles - a nuclear plant can be "decommissioned" but the plant can never be fully removed, and the land and resources will not be able to be reclaimed for any other use for millions of years - a catastrophe at a nuclear plant means the evacuation of a large area, and could render a large area uninhabitable for eons - the only nuclear facilities ever seriously considered for small scale power production, known as pebble bed reactors, reduce concentration of nuclear fuel, but vastly increase the volume of nuclear waste Solar:
- can be produced locally and at scales appropriate to need/use
— removes inefficiency of transmission
— reduces cost of infrastructure
— reduces impact of infrastructure
— reduces security risks
— facilities can be added to existing structures
- multiple ways to create energy (PV, steam, chimney effect)
- can be used to create forms of energy other than electricity, such as:
— heat, motion, or used directly as light
— removes inefficiency of multiple conversions
- in the case of large scale solar facilities, a decommissioned plant can usually be converted back to cropland, habitat, urban use, or any use almost immediately
- a catastrophe at a large scale solar facility would be reason to evacuate no more than the most local community (this has happened in a oil-based solar trough plant)

Nuclear:
- from design to decommissioning, including mining and refinement, nuclear power produces about 75% as much carbon dioxide as fossil fuels
- nuclear power currently is only developed in HUGE plants, thus concentrating power production, so it is only feasible near large population centers, presents a national security risk (as well as risks of wastes mentioned by others)
- nuclear can only be used to create electricity, which requires transmission infrastructure to point of use, which is costly to build and maintain
- nuclear power must heat water, which is used to turn turbines, which generate electricity — so nuclear energy must be converted three times to become electricity, and there is a loss of efficiency at each stage
- nuclear fuel requires large amounts of mining at multiple stages:
— intense cement and steel production for construction, both industries of which are huge carbon emitters
— large amounts of uranium mining to produce enough ore to be refined into fuel
— large amounts of petrol must be extracted to fuel the mining and transportation equipment/vehicles
- a nuclear plant can be “decommissioned” but the plant can never be fully removed, and the land and resources will not be able to be reclaimed for any other use for millions of years
- a catastrophe at a nuclear plant means the evacuation of a large area, and could render a large area uninhabitable for eons
- the only nuclear facilities ever seriously considered for small scale power production, known as pebble bed reactors, reduce concentration of nuclear fuel, but vastly increase the volume of nuclear waste

]]>