electricity

by

Solar Chimney

Grose, T. (2014, April 16). Solar Chimneys Can Convert Hot Air to Energy, But Is

Funding a Mirage?. National Geographic, National Geographic: Daily News,

Energy.Retrieved July 13, 2014, from

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/04/140416-

solar-updraft-towers-convert-hot-air-to-energy/

 

An inventive idea for a harnessing solar power that has long been looked to as a solution to the demand for energy has met numerous delays and issues. The solar chimney is an old idea that has been considered for years to be a possible solution to the question of green energy, but it is facing increasing problems with funding due the sheer size of the projects. Currently only one chimney in is under construction. Built in the arid central plains of Australia the chimney is going to be one kilometer tall and will cost more than a billion dollars. The towers are also much less efficient than solar panels.

 

 

The solar chimney is a valid energy production method and is made feasible by its lack of maintenance problems. The only moving part in a solar chimney is the turbine so there is little risk of mechanical damage. Because of this there is no need for constant maintenance as there is when using solar panels. Unfortunately the enormous up front cost of building these structures is preventing them from becoming common. However, due to the chimney’s convenient durability they may be sound investments in the future and could provide large quantities of clean cheap energy.

by

Power Problem for Tennessee

Gang, D. (2014, September 3). Tva’s costly reactor illuminates nuclear challenge.

USA Today. Retrieved September 7, 2014, from  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/tva-nuclear-reactor-challenge/14990433/

 

In Tennessee, the new Watts Bar nuclear reactor is scheduled to start operating in 2015, and will provide electricity to 650,000 homes. However, the project could cost over $4 billion, demonstrating the problems with nuclear power. Eight other reactors across the United States are being decommissioned because of reparation costs and competition from natural gas. If gas prices spike again, nuclear power might become viable, but environmentalists are critical of the dangers of radioactive waste.

 

This article highlights a major downside of nuclear power which is often overlooked: Despite the large amount of power they produce, the reactors themselves do not last forever. One reactor costs $4 billion to build, and in the future, decommissioning it will not be cheap either.  In order to support nuclear power, a country would have to pay for building, maintaining, disposing waste from, and then eventually replacing power plants. Furthermore, constructing  power plants could have an environmental impact, since building massive concrete structures in any location would disrupt the existing ecosystem.

by

A Nuclear Future for Maryland

Ervin, D. (2014, August 26). Confidence –the nuclear option [commentary]. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved September 8, 2014, from

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-nuclear-power-20140826%2C0%2C5377479.story

 

Maryland is attempting to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions from electricity by 36.5 percent by 2030, and it needs nuclear power to do so. In addition to an existing nuclear power plant, newer designs enable the construction of plants that produce more energy than they use. Solar and wind energy systems only produce power about a third of the time they are active. Nuclear power plants, although expensive to build, produce power 90 percent of the time they are active, and only cost 2.14 cents per kilowatt hour of production. In the long term, nuclear energy is cheaper, cleaner, and an option in which Maryland must invest.

 

Nuclear energy is definitely an attractive option for clean energy since it can produce lots of power and emits virtually no carbon dioxide. Exploring safe nuclear energy options could be the task of future environmental scientists since it seems like a viable option for the nation’s power needs. The key word is safe, however, since hastily building expensive nuclear reactors without proper safety protocol and waste-disposal methods could lead to environmental and economic disaster.