Advertisement
Most Popular Posts
- Viewed
- Commented
- Liked
Recent Comments
Bill McKibben: A call for direct action on climate
Ask Umbra: Dangerous cosmetics get a black eye
Welcome to the colorful Colorado governor's race 

Comments
Post a Comment +
And of courseSolarThermal, and Geothermal both use water too.
But they use more-than-10x less than Nuclear/Coal power plants.
And then there's hydroHydro is down 70% in the southeast.
How much is residential water use in the southeast? 150-200 gallons/house/day?
1 MWh/day provides electricity to 700 houses or so.
Biomass and coal consume 300 - 480 gallon/MWh, and I assume efficient natural gas is even lower. Coal and natural gas help cause droughts, so how does that affect the choice?
Nuclear consumes 400 - 720 gallon/MWh
Solar thermal: 1,060 gallon/MWh
Geothermal: 1,800-4,000 gallon/MWh
The southeast doesn't have wind, so you want to power the whole area with photovoltaics and batteries?
A Musing Environment
Karen Street
Solar Geothermal waterGreyFlcn
And both can reduce that consumption near zero. Geothermal can used close cycle Rankine engines that consume zero water in operation. (Anything takes water to build of course.) This slightly more expensive than conventional geothermal, but it also eliminates emissions geothermal otherwise produces; it make for much cleaner geothermal in general.
Similarly solar thermal can be air cooled at the expenses of a 10% energy loss. Or you can used close cycle cooling water at the expense of a tiny increase in capital expenses. Speculatively you could use waste heat from solar thermal to distill or desalinate contaminated water; it could be last step in recycling of sewage or agricultural runoff. Urban and agricultural desert dwellers in greenhouse earth probably will need to close their water cycles in any case. Distillation of used water (after other cleaning steps have been completed) with waste heat from solar thermal plants could be a key part of this.
Good articleBut we're missing an obvious solution.
"coal and gas-fired power plants withdrew more than 650 million gallons of water per day from seven dry western states in 2000 -- Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming -- enough to take care of the water needs of at least 3.64 million people for a year."
Let's see, the population of just Arizona is 6.2 million. Wouldn't it make sense to use waste heat from power generation to heat domestic water and perhaps even our homes?* This would not only remove much of the water wasted by thermal plants, but it would also remove much of the (expensive and polluting) fuel we use for heat. If we really set up the system right, we could dump heat to our waste water as well.
The answer is: of course it would. This is such a good idea that hotels are installing expensive equipment and burning expensive natural gas to make their own electricity, with remarkable payback. Imagine if our power company gave/sold us our heat instead of boiling away water with it.
* and yes, this would work for geothermal or solar thermal as well
Correction"and perhaps even heat our homes"
speaking of h2o and nukesnote that Exelon is burying its spent fuel rods 200 feet from Lake Michigan in Zion
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-zionplant_bd ...
idsNot really "burying", they're in concreate casks meant for storage and transportation (to Yucca, they hope). And they'll be moved another 400' away once the plant is dismantled (did you read the story you linked to?). Of course with a good nuclear energy plan we can start reusing the stuff.
too many words, JRwhat do we do to make Green energy the cheaper option for the consumer
and how do we communicate this info?
To hell with what is wrong, how do we do it right?
specifically
what do we do tomorrow and the day after?
what requires legislation, what does not?
the average person and average pol are not reading Grist daily
and even if they did, I do not think they would come away with a clear, concise idea of "what is to be done"
ExelonExelon a big Barack contributor. He helped them out of a leak jam awhile back? A bill to force reporting of leaks was weakened to require virtually no consequences for under reporting. And it didn't even pass in that form.
Yes water water, it's the big issue. Renewables and conservation, plugin hybrids and geo heat exchange all conserve it. Pumped hydro storage powered by wind to backup the renewable grid can help restore aquifers.
Offshore floating wind/wave power platforms can desalinate sea water for cities, saving river water.
Nuclear, coal to liquids, tar sands oil, fuel farming, are all huge water users at every stage of mining and processing and generation. Water issues alone dictate the renewable/conservation solution to energy policy.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Not really.
No. That would be a bad idea.
When they "reuse" the waste, they are primarily using the "chaff" Uranium-238.
If you take that part out, the remaining waste is nearly identical in radioactivity.
So it doesn't really do you any favors.
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891
http://www.fissilematerials.org/ipfm/site_down/ipfmresear ...