FOSSIL, SOLAR AND NUCLEAR ENERGY
Fossil energy
Though there is a will of running out of fossil fuels, nowadays the world is threatened more by the abundance of fossil fuels than by scarcity. Of course, there will be a local scarcity of some fuels. And there is turbulence in the push and pull between oil supply and oil demand. But there are at least four forces that in the long run suggest that fossil fuels will be widely available.
1. Technological change.
2. The geological diversity of the resource.
3. Price elasticity.
4. Substitution and conversion.
Solar energy
Nuclear energy
The environmentalist case against nuclear power is roughly the following. First, it is dangerous, thinking most about the long-term dangers of nuclear waste disposal and the acute dangers of reactor accidents. Second, it is unnecessary. We have alternatives efficiency and renewable, most of all. Third, it is expensive in that it costs more than those alternatives, efficient, and renewable. And fourth, many people who do not like nuclear power do not like it because it comes in large, centralized lumps.
The environmentalist case for nuclear power is roughly the following. First, it is a source of zero-carbon power that could be scaled up to supply tens of terawatts of primary power. There is no obvious limit. Second, it has a very low land footprint. Even counting mining, waste, et cetera, the land footprint of nuclear power is lower than any other energy system, much lower than most renewables. And most environmental impacts are ultimately tied to the land footprint.
Written by
S.Heshanka
Undergraduate
Department of Civil and Environmental Technology
Faculty of Technology, University of Sri Jayewardenepura
Comments
Post a Comment