![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
dv8nation.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12895157
China is #1 in low carbon energy and tops in making solor panels and wind turbines. I'm a bit surprised but given recent events this accomplishment seems extra noteworthy. Now I'm of the opinion that a lot of the freaking out people are doing over nuclear power is foolish, foolish or note it will hurt the nuke industry. Given this and China's rising power makes me wonder if solor and wind aren't due for a major expansion in use.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 07:17 (UTC)I'm of the opinion that a lot of the freaking out people are doing over nuclear power is foolish
Well, you are certainly entitled to an opinion. And so is the IAEA, who seem to think the evacuation zone is 20 miles too small. (http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/31_18.html)So, is the IAEA foolishly freaking out or what?
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 07:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 07:55 (UTC)Anyhow, its hard to be rational when we just don't have enough data.
We don't know how many cancers crop up because the incubation period is from 0 to 60 years. We don't know how many genetic mutations will be passed on for an unknown number of generation, but we do know its not zero. We don't know how the concentrations will vary as it comes up the food chain. We don't know that for animal or marine life. We're like Romans with lead.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 15:48 (UTC)Even if we are to assume that an event of this magnitude were to happen once every 20 years and render an 8000 sq Kilometer (50.46 KM radius circle) uninhabitable for a period of 500 years. That would mean that at most 200,000 sq KM of land would be rendered unusable.
That is an amount of land equal in size to the State of Nebraska or the Country of Belarus.
According to Greenpeace the US alone destroyed 1/8th of that territory in just 70 years from Coal Mining...
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/coal/Mining-impacts/
(Note, 1 Hecatare = .01 Sq KM)
And as far as Wind and Solar go, well you'd need to cover an area 10 times that large in solar panels/windmills to generate even a fraction of the electricity that the Nuclear does.
http://jlnsolar.com/wind-solar.html
Wind generates about 300 KWH per acre and Solar about 450KWH which translates to 75MWH per SQ KM for Wind and 115 MWH per SQ KM for Solar.
Total Nuclear power generation in 2009 was 2.5 Billion MWH
So assuming we can somehow double the efficiency of both Solar and Wind per acre of land use in order to equal the Nuclear power generated in 2009 you would need
16.67 Million Sq KM for Wind
10.87 Million Sq KM for Solar
So you'd need to completely cover an area equivalent to Russia in Windmills or Canada plus Bolivia in Solar Panels just to replace the nuclear power plants we have already constructed and even that assumes that we can double the efficiency we get out of them today.