Sites you may be interested in Open Source » Blog Archive » Global Warming: Coal [...]

If you can transmit power over large distances with zero transmission loss, it means that you no longer need to co-locate power supply and demand.

American Superconductors is an example of a company that is already transmitting power over large distances on the american east coast with zero tranmission loss.

Here is an article:

http://www.mitforumcambridge.org/archive/r_apr02.html#sponsor

So, given this technology, why can we not consider re-building (again) a set of large wind-power stations – in the areas where they are most efficient – and using cryogenic technology to transmit the power to the demand – probably retaining most of the existing grid in the demand areas, and re-furbishing the real estate currently occupied by fossil-fuel power generators to act as drop zones.

Yes, this is probably about a 20-year plan, but we must start sometime, and think of the jobs and technical opportunities that it would retain in this country in the meantime.

thanks for reading this post.

mr

I was told that at no cost to me I could be listed as a supporter and member. I would receive updates on legislative issues etc.

When I pressed the caller regarding the funding for this group, I was passed on to the supervisor. She informed me that it was sponsored by the electricity and coal industries.

Interesting.

Technically you’re right, of course, but it ain’t gonna happen. This is “Think Global, Act Local”‘s worst nightmare.

At a local level many places ar now promoting MORE people. Several European nations have recently instituted incentived to have MORE children because of the declining labor force and fear of having to rely on immigrant workers. Even China is said to b rethinking their “one child” policy in the wake of recent projections of labor shortages in future years!

There’s no technical reason why nuclear couldn’t/shouldn’t be the wave of the future. The reasons are all political.

1. Lack of storage for nuclear waste. It’s criminal to let long-term nuclear waste pile up without anywhere to put it. Yucca Mountain is decades overdue and the government keeps dragging its feet on resolving this vital issue.

2. Insurance liability. The risk of a nuclear accident is very low, so insurance for it should be cheap. Instead, it’s unobtainable, thanks to the Price Anderson Act. The premise of the Price Anderson Act is that the nuclear industry’s liability should be set artificially low, commercial insurance should be limited or blocked, and that if there was a major accident Congress would step in make everything alright. But most business and home owners have never believed this, and in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, their skepticism has been reinforced.

We could have a thriving nuclear power industry in the US if #1 and #2 were properly addressed. But until they are most people would be sensible to oppose nuclear power.

CFB have comparable efficiency to other types of boilers. Their advantages comes in through lower emissions and fuel flexibility, not efficiency and did not come into service until the mid 80’s.