Re: Hydro vs. Wind Power Industries
Oh RDK...a statistical fatality calcualtion... A meaningless statistic that provide no meaningful context to the issue.
You just have to look at the result to know who paid for the study that produced such wonderful products of mixing data to fabricate a "fact".
Nuclear is expensive and corrupting the political cutlure. The waste magagement is an ever increasing burden for the society, that will need to passen on for generations.
Furthermore, the continuation of institutionalized nuclear lobbys like the IAEA or EURATOM,... is part of problems like we witness in Iran right now.
You can't disconnect spreading nuclear power around the globe and the threat of proliferation of dual-use technologies.
On the topic of this threat.
The problem is caused by renewables not being utilized in a efficent way.
Renewable energy has a low energy density, but a gigantic potential. The inefficancy starts by pushing renewable generation into the paradigm of conventional electricity generation => centralized production.
It's neither smart nor neccessary to have massive centralized renewable energy generation to supply decentralized consumption.
Further more it's not economically for the consumers. That doesn't mean, that renewables aren't economically.
The state of technology has progressed to a point, that decentralized application of renewables technologies produces electricity significantly cheaper than coal, gas or uranium from the grid.
The question is simple:
1. Who can make use of this in a profitable way?
2. And how do you organize the installation of the required decentralized regional infrastructure?
1. Well it's definatly not very profitable to replace coal, gas & uranium energy by renewables, when your company (utility/energy corporation) is also involved in mining, transportation, enrichment and distribution.
It's actually a threat to the self-interessts of such corporation, if a huge part of their old investments in the neccessary supply chain to produce&distribute conventional energy aren't completly paid off.
In such a case, increasing renewable capacities decreases their profits, no matter how cheap the electricity from a windmill is.
2. Having that in mind, it makes the most sense for the consumers themselves to become energy producers. Investments in renewables do not require that much capital, so the barrier to get into this buisness isn't as high as with conventional energy production, that requires huge investments and an entire supply chain. A modern windturbine can produce electricity at relativly low wind speeds.
For example the Enercon E-101 from 2011 is such a low-wind speed turbine that has a capacity of 3MW. It costs about $5-7 million Dollar and produces electricity at $0.03-0.06 per kWh.
It is a gearless, low maintainance design, the generator cooling system uses the heat to prevent icing in winter...
If you got a factory that has constant demand of more than 3MW, you could build one of those immediatly and enjoy cheap energy whenever the wind allows it.
That company could save alot of cash, even in the US where energy is (kept) rather cheap.
A utility on the other hand, has no desire to install such a system...
For the company / community that installs something like that by themselvs it's cost efficent, increases the value added in their region/of their products and they life the spirt of independence.
Last edited by El_Zoido; 03-09-2012 at 06:33 AM.
"So called 'energy-experts' claim that the switch to renewable energy sources would take a very long time and that it would 'not be profitable'.
But there is no objective denomination of "not being profitable". One must always ask not profitable for who?"
-- Hermann Scheer