environment,energy,greenhouse,gas,carbon,dioxide,global,nuclear energy,clean energy,emissions,global climate change,environmental impacts, Nuclear Energy Can Save US: Clean Energy is Cheap

Nuclear Energy Can Save US--America�s 100 nukes equal four million barrels of oil per day.


Billions of lives and civilization itself may be at risk from the Global Warming & End of Cheap Oil, Crisis. Rising sea levels and rising oil prices could be the end of civilization as we know it. The problem is so huge that the most powerful answer, many nuclear plants, must be deployed. Currently, America‘s 100 nukes deliver the energy of four million barrels of oil per day. Wind and solar cannot do the job, and may delay the real answer too long. Still, all kinds of clean energy, plus conservation, plus reducing deforestation, will be needed to help the poor half of the world, and for civilization to survive through this century.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Clean Energy is Cheap

The world currently consumes 450Q(BTU) of manmade energy per year. This equals energy of 5500, one-gig nukes, or 16,500,000, one-meg wind turbines (at 8-hours per day, 3 gigs of rated wind, equal one-gig of nuclear). At $4B per nuke, or $2M per turbine, 450Q would cost $25T or $35T respectively. Better yet, for $60T capital cost, plants with 900Q yearly energy capacity could be built. Costs would rise thru the century, but nowhere near oil inflation; fuel will always be cheap (one pound nuke fuel equals 500,000 pounds coal, and wind is free).
These capital costs may sound high, but they are bargains compared to current $1.8T per year for $60 oil (85MBPD, equal to 30BBPY). (This equals $18T in just a decade.) As oil disappears this century, long before, most likely, oil will be $100, $200, $300 and more per barrel (true world price without speculation). Yearly costs will easily be $3T, $6T and $9T, respectively for only 40% of 450Q. Per decade, if indeed the world can afford it, oil will cost $30T, $60T or $90T.
The $60T capital cost (as escalated) would be easy for the world during this century, and would give 900Q of clean energy which is FIVE times as much as current 170Q of oil. Even as capital costs rise through the century, these plants will always be massive bargains; and incidentally, save world civilization from climate change.
In a later post, possible bottlenecks and construction difficulties will be discussed.

2 comments:

Left Atomics said...

It is not "8 hours per days" but "24".

Also, modern post 1992 NPP are not $4 billion but about $2.5B. The two Japanese ABWRs came in around $2.1 Billion.

David Walters

shawrich said...

I would like to see data showing that the wind blows hard enough to give rated turbine energy for 24 hours a day, anywhere in the world, much less on an average over some huge field. EIA data some years ago showed, for 2000, installed wind capacity, and yearly Q. I computed this to mean turbines gave energy only 1/4 of a day (6 hours). The 2025 column indicated 1/3 duty (8 hours). I took that to mean they projected turbine efficiency to increase. Unfortunately, I can't find it in EIA now, but it still seems logical to me.