Amaros
Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aneirin To myself, I am a believer in nuclear technology as being the answer, things have moved on a long way since the old nuclear stations and their problems, thinking of Windscale, Chernobyl and long island here.Plus, there is other technologies based on nuclear that should be given a chance beyond laboratory experiments. It's good to keep investigating nuclear, but micropower is the only solution at the moment in the US, and most of the developing world, I don't know abotu the UK, but we're up agaisnt the limitations of our outdated grid - in many places, we simply can't put any more energy into it without overloading it, thus talk of new large scale generating facilites is absurd - the cost of building a new grid here are astronomical - eaiser perhaps inthe UK. Then there is export, somehow I feel better exporting PV cells, high efficiency turbines and windmills than I do exporting fissionable materials na nuclear technology, and there are a lot of regions in the world that simply do not possess the natural resources, coal, oil, natural gas, to support a modern industrial or post industrial economy. Much better to go with renewable micropower to supplement and replace domestic use, allowing current large production facilites to provide service during peak demand, and to industry which has higher levels of demand that micropower can't supply. It's basically stretching what we have here, without overloading the grid. Globally, it's about developing emerging markets - if Arabs don't have electricity then there is also no demand for televisions and microwaves, etc.
|