4 ms·
Why is it an exercise in futility? Hydro power accounts for a huge amount of our power already, and there's enough in wind and solar for the rest of it. Nuclear
by DaniFong 17y ago
Why is it an exercise in futility? Hydro power accounts for a huge amount of our power already, and there's enough in wind and solar for the rest of it. Nuclear is presently quite expensive and takes a very long time to build. There are new technologies being pursued, but there are new technologies being pursued in wind and solar, too.
- borism 17y agoIndeed, we shouldn't forget economic side of this. Nuclear fission is physically the most powerful power source we can control now, that's true. But it is very capital intensive. Solution is not a single technology, it's a combination of solar, wind, geothermal, natural gas, nuclear etc.
- AngryParsley 17y ago6.1% is a huge amount of our power? The US generates 3x more electricity from nuclear than hydro: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_US_electricity_generation_by_source_v2.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_US_electricity_genera... Most of the cost-effective places to build hydroelectric dams are already utilized. Also, the lakes created behind the dams displace people. By choosing a more expensive form of power generation, the economy is impacted. This is an often-overlooked external cost of renewables.
- DaniFong 17y agoIt's 19% of worldwide electricity generation. http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/wuhy.html http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/wuhy.html Furthermore, hydropower may be throttled up and down, such that the combination of hydro + wind and solar can hit penetrations near 50% before more energy storage is needed. Also, wind power is less expensive on a kwhr delivered basis than coal. http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Ia.html http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Ia.html