After the earthquake in Japan and the crisis with the Fukushima Power Plant, I bet you thought I would talk about nuclear power in this post, but I decided to go a different route and talk about solar power. The article I found that prompted this week's post, actually talks about the Fukushima incident, but in respect as to how it affected solar energy.If you have ever driven down 6th Avenue towards Denver, then you may have seen the photovoltaic cells, or solar panels, to your right, in front of the Federal Center. These panels convert the solar radiation from the sun shining on them into electrical current using semiconductors along their surface that exhibit the photovoltaic effect. This effect refers to the photons of light from the sun knocking electrons into a higher energy state, which creates the electrical current and, thus, electricity.
Since Fukushima, unease about nuclear energy has risen, resulting in an increased interest in solar and wind energy. Stocks in many solar companies have risen in the last few weeks, marking the added interest in the area, rising an average of 3.6% in the last week alone. Germany has also taken action to promote solar energy instead of nuclear, by planning on installing enough solar cells to generate 7.5 gigawatts in 2011. Also, they recently elected a Green party-led coalition over a Conservative party in one of their states as a result of anti-nuclear voters.
Unfortunately there is a lot of truth here, but you have to be sure to bring a little perspective. Germany has been trying to lessen its dependence on nuclear power for years, and the Fukushima incident has only given them a little more license to do so. This comes as no surprise to anybody in the nuclear industry.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, the U.S. seems to be moving ahead with nuclear power. The NRC just a couple days ago approved an environmental study for two nuclear power plants to be built. This is one of the biggest steps that has been taken to build new plants in the last 30 years.
We have a long time till we understand what has happened at the Fukushima plant, but right now the situation is not near as bad as people are touting it to be. I remain optimistic that this will actually show how resilient nuclear power is even to worst case disasters. In reality, we have roughly 28,000 people dead and missing from the earthquake and tsunami, but we have nobody even hurt due to the Fukushima incident. This is including the workers as well.
I know that solar and wind energies will play a big part in the future, but the technologies are not ready to replace nuclear power. In order for solar to replace nuclear power in the United States, we would need over 3000 square miles of solar arrays. This is ten times the size of New York City! If we want to do some of it with wind, we would need more land area yet. It just isn't happening anytime soon, so as of now we need nuclear power.
I like Aaron's point a lot, but I would also say that the two reactors he's talking about are probably going to go in at an existing reactor site--so it's not new power plants. We've seen build-outs like this before, and I'm not sure they are evidence of a move forward with nuclear power, necessarily.
ReplyDeleteThe more interesting question, from my perspective, that comes from your post is whether policy can force particular kinds of technological innovation. Can we just decide to support solar and all of a sudden solar will appear, in ways that are financially and technically feasible? I'm not sure. Certainly, we can install new solar panels and get more electricity from renewables than we have been. But I don't know that we can mandate that they replace nuclear power and voila, it will be done. So watching this closely will be very interesting in the coming years.
You make an interesting point and how the economy reacts to the diaster.
ReplyDeleteWon't policy be influenced by the people; therefore if society takes the Fukushima disaster the wrong way, solar or wind will gain a lot more attention.