🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.physics
Article #1467

Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)

#1467
From: mdd
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:13
37 lines
2808 bytes
No one seems to have mentioned this yet...There are other ways to  
distribute solar power besides using an electrical grid. Solar power can  
be used to convert water to hydrogen quite efficiently and the hydrogen  
could then be transported through an infrastructure similar to the natural  
gas infrastructure that already exists. End users would then burn the  
hydrogen. Or even better use it to power fuel cells. It is likely (I am no  
expert) that is a more cost effective approach to solar energy than  
erecting solar panels on the East coast, say. 

Another renewable energy source that doesn't contribute to global warming  
would be gasification of biomass. Biomass grown and harvested specifically  
for energy use can be turned into hydrogen and methane that can then be  
transported in pipelines and burned. There is no net increase in  
atmospheric CO2 if things are managed correctly. 

It seems pretty clear to me that people need to think about these new  
technologies. The picture of solar energy as a panel on every rooftop is  
somewhat outdated. New nuclear power is not much more than a stopgap  
measure, at least in its present form. And certainly any new nuclear  
plants should not be in the old style. Safer, smaller plants of uniform  
and well-tested design is the preferred direction. I seem to recall that  
there is only about 70 years worth of fissionable uranium to be found,  
although breeder reactors would be able to get around this shortcoming. 

In summary, there are several different alternative energy sources that  
are environmentally benign and could be quickly developed and implemented  
if we chose to vigorously pursue them. And, finally, there certainly can  
be nothing wrong with encouraging conservation. New building designs that  
can greatly reduce the amount of power used for heating and air  
conditioning is one area of active research. Conservation is certainly  
cheaper and more cost-effective than building new plants. Why else would  
power companies offer $30 million for an efficient, CFC-free refrigerator?

Well I have gone on enough so I'll stop here. 

Mark Doyle, Almost Ph(inishe)D.
mdd@nextc.princeton.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Jul24.221351.10050@Princeton.EDU>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!kb2ear!princeton!nextc.Princeton.EDU!mdd
References: <1992Jul24.210910.5092@vexcel.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!kb2ear!princeton!nextc.Princeton.EDU!mdd
From: mdd@nextc.Princeton.EDU.ampr.org
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)
Message-ID: <1992Jul24.221351.10050@Princeton.EDU>
Date: 24 Jul 92 22:13:51 GMT
References: <1992Jul24.210910.5092@vexcel.com>
Sender: news@Princeton.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: mdd@nextc.princeton.edu
Organization: Princeton University
Lines: 37
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU
Nntp-Posting-Host: nextc.princeton.edu