seahawk

Why I'm Long Uranium and Nuclear / Power Engineering

I think he was talking PRICE! Let's get back to reality.


On Aug 18 08:56 AM ricardoRI wrote:

> The author makes a comment: "Quite frankly nothing else comes close
> to nuclear power with any sort of scale."
>
> Sorry, you are totally out of touch. Certainly there are some fads,
> like retro-fitted rooftop PV solar that do not make sense. There
> are several technologies that each can realistically supply 100%
> of the US electrical demand:
>
> Thermal solar: 10,000 square miles of the Southwest (owned by the
> Federal government) can readily produce 100% electrical demand. Thermal
> has tremendous energy enertia, and can provide baseload power, even
> at night.
>
> Ocean thermal energy conversion: utilizing the difference in water
> temperature from the surface to the bottom. The energy can be transported
> via NH3 synthesis, and used as motor fuel as well as boiler fuel
> for shoreside power plants
>
> High altitude wind: Kites can fly at 20,000+ feet and run int he
> jetstream. The area above a traditional nuclear reactor (1000 acres)
> can produce several gigawatts of power, 24/7.
>
> Dry geothermal: In the western half of the country deep geothermal
> resources can provide baseload power.
>
> Offshore wind: floating wind turbines can produce huge amounts of
> power. With NH3 (ammonia) production, the power can be used as transportation
> fuel or transmitted to the grid as electricity.
>
> The point is that EACH of these renewable sources could supply 100%
> of the US electrical demand. I have not run the numbers yet for
> other parts of the world.
>
> Should nuclear be part of the solution? Absolutely. But don't be
> ignorant of other technologies that have the potential to be game
> changing.