Thursday, October 14, 2010

The nuclear power demand.

In this topic, we will debating about the electrical generated by nuclear power plant that supplying the energy daily needed. Although at present the world is fighting the challenge of energy supply, next generations worries will take into account other fundamental aspects as how to run transports and potential lack of water, which are both primary needs. Today, about 85 percent of world energy needs come from exhaustible resources, mainly fossil fuels and as a minor contributor, uranium. The oil supply covers about 34%, by far the largest share, followed by coal (24%), natural gas (21.5%), nuclear (5.5%) and renewables (15%), including traditional biomass. As we know before, one third of these sources is used for electricity production of about 16,000 Terawatt hours per every year. Considering the world energy demand, it must be seriously doubted whether increasing rates of fossil fuel supplies are to be considered sustainable. It is much more likely, that their share will strongly reduce until 2030 in favor of increasing renewable contributions. Moreover nuclear energy today avoids the emission of about 2 billion atm CO2 annually.

Previously, in 1995, the electric utilities emissions of carbon dioxide world-wide were 32 percent lower than they would have been if nuclear energy had been used instead of fuel fossil. Let we know that the emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide were 35 and 31 percent lower, respectively. Globally, nuclear energy has been the most important factor in preventing carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions related to electric power generation. As proved, handling with safety, no other industry has invested so much time and money in the safety aspect of their business than has the nuclear industry. Over half the initial capital investment of a nuclear power plant goes into the safety systems, because of these and other relevant aspects, nuclear plant are to be considered among the best solutions to meet great energetic and environmental challenges. 

In addition, hydrogen production by nuclear energy which is electrolitically, and in the future high-temperature reactors, thermo chemically will assumed as a fundamental role. This so much discussed “energy carrier” is widely seen as the main future transport fuel, especially for the world environmental burden. Since ,its combustion produces only water vapor, with no carbon dioxide or carbon monoxide emissions. In addition,lack of potable water must be seriously considered, because it is set to become a constraint on development in many world regions. In fact, at present estimated that one fifth of the world's population does not have access to potable drinking water, and that this portion will increase due to population growth relative to water resources. The worst-affected areas are the arid and semiarid regions of Asia and North Africa. Wars over access to water, not simply energy and mineral resources, are therefore to be considered conceivable.

As a reflection, where water cannot be obtained from streams and aquifers, desalination of seawater or mineralized groundwater is required. Nuclear energy can help also in this direction, through the industrial process of desalination, which it is generally cost competitive with using fossil fuels. Nuclear energy is also an excellent source of process heat for various industrial applications including synthetic and unconventional oil production and from about 2003 various proposals have been made to use nuclear power to produce steam for extraction of oil. Lastly, use of nuclear energy as a heating source is greatly challenged by the economic factor since the nuclear heating reactors have relative small size and often the lower plant load factor. However, use of very simple reactor could be a possible way to supply heat economically.

25 comments:

  1. Hey there.

    I agree with the nuclear power demand in our current situation. Malaysia has to move on to nuclear power as soon as posible because of the depletion of our natural resources. Besides that, we are affected by the price hike of fossil fuel and trust me, the cost of fossil fuel will get higher and higher in the coming years.

    Of course the nuclear industry has to spend the most on safety. Nuclear energy provides us huge amount of energy with little amount of resources but it also come with a GREAT risk. We certainly do not want Chernobyl accident to happen again thus alot of researches have been done throughout the decades.

    Hydrogen fuel is indeed a good source of fuel, especially for vehicles because it does not produce carbon dioxide thus preventing global warming to occur.

    In my opinion, based on our current situation, we can no longer depend on our natural resources. Nuclear is our main priority now besides other renewable energies.

    Thank You.

    LIM CHEE KEONG (ME 083567)
    eric9090@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello,
    Yes, the current 85% of energy derived from exhaustible resouces is way too much. Thus the only way to curtail this is by using Nuclear power. It has many advantages and benefits both financially(long term) and environmentally. However, I believe the misconceptions that lie in the general publics mind about nuclear will be a huge hindrance. Thus the government must go on a drive to start convincing the public to have a paradigm shift to support nuclear power. But I believe this is possible !

    JASON FRANCIS
    jason_spyboy@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. hi frez,
    I agree with the above statement,this is because the current statistics shows that we are 85% solely depends on the non-renewable energy,that will going to completely used up by 2060,so i think it's a good time for us to start something new,and educate public to give fully support to the goverment,to utilise this nuclear power plant idea into reality

    KESAVAN S/O MOHANADAS
    CE083434
    kesavan712554@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi
    the facts about desalination of water...why do u have to use from nuclear energy...In fact if we harvest solar energy..there are many beneficial things we could consume such as water heater, house heater, desalination, cooking industry, MAIN THING--electricity....isnt it too much process involves to desalinate water by nuclear..in the mean time its free for solar energy...

    I know that nuclear is better than fossil fuels when it comes to carbon dioxide, but nuclear energy is by no means clean. We don't know what to do with the waste we already have and it seems like a bad idea to me to make more when we have so many cleaner options such as wind and solar.
    -- Sheryl Crow

    the cheapest energy is the energy you don't use in the first place.
    -- Sheryl Crow

    Because we are now running out of gas and oil, we must prepare quickly for a third change, to strict conservation and to the use of ... permanent renewable energy sources, like solar power.
    ~ Jimmy Carter
    http://www.betterworld.net/quotes/energy-quotes.htm

    mohamed nabeel b sidek
    me083582

    ReplyDelete
  5. hi there,
    i'm absolutely agree with nabeel,
    right now government is giving grant to all companies who want to install or purchasing green energy devices, government should do same thing to public as they did to these companies, so that public will willing to purchase one as who don't want free energy... Beside this step actually like paying public for making their house into power plant itself and government don't need a new sites for the power plant. It is like most of the green building exist right now, the buildings installing wind turbine and solar panel on their roof to generates electricity to reduce their electricity usage that come from TNB. Or some building use electricity from TNB and selling back the electricity that generates from their turbines to TNB so they can reduce the figure on their bills. Let say if 2 million peoples around KL and Selangor (as we know the population in KL and Selangor is about 7 million) to install one wind turbine and one solar panel on their house roof there already 2 million solar panel and 2 million wind turbine and that is a big number even though the power generated is not enough for them but at least government don't need to open a new solar panel or wind turbine power plant site.that is only for an example. besides we can install wind turbine near roadside, because roadside has a lot of wind. or any other wind places... or maybe you can install hybrid wind turbine.
    (MD NAZRIN BIN MD NAZIR, nazrinnazir.90@gmail.com)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nabil,nuke waste can be managed.The nuclear waste can be recycled and reused again.Nowadays,they put the nuclear waste in the tube of glass and let the radioactive decay.We should notice that the radioactive will decay until they are disappear.That is it.It is simple.Regarding to solar/wind turbine/other renewable energy, all of them cannot provide the base load (electricity)required by our country.We do not have enough high speed wind(inconsistent).We are talking about to supply the based load.I do agree that RE also important but as supported energy.If 7 million people in Selangor are to be installed with solar panel,but how about the cost? For your info, its take about RM 30000- RM 60000 per unit of solar panel to be installed.That cost too much.Not all people are capable to buy that.If we ask government to buy it for us,its take about (RM 60000 per unit x 700000 peoples = RM 42000000000= RM 42 billions) .But we have more people than that.In this case,the nuclear power plant is way cheaper because cost around RM 2 billions.From my point of view, nuclear energy must work together with renewable energy

    ReplyDelete
  7. on behalf of future generation,i think it is better for us to start develop the nuclear power plant in the country as well as many other country in the world which they had started this project years ago..

    nik zakaria bin nik mustoffa
    me083873
    nik_nod32@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  8. An NPP is a great start towards being green. As we all know, all conventional fuel sources produces green house gases and they will be exhausted sooner or later. The only way of curbing these shortcomings are by using nuclear power plant or other renewable power sources. Solar and wind is all good but the area needed to built the plants are very and i mean VERY big. Solar voltaic cells are also expensive as well. And to make these areas available, we need to clear a huge chunk of rain forest from our country which is the problem where we're trying to prevent. NPP uses a small area and does not pollute. Which is pretty awesome if you ask me.

    Jan Siong Lim
    ME083552
    jansionglim@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  9. hi,
    i agree that npp is beneficial in future.. well, if we can spend 5 billion on a 100 storey bangunan warisan..why cant we spend a significant amount of money on something that will be useful in future.. of course we might end up paying a lot of taxes like americans.but for the sake of a brighter future,i believe that this is a brilliant move..

    utrasenan a/l gunasegaran
    me083416
    utrasenan_87@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  10. hi,
    i agree with all of you guys, we cant be depending on depleting resources, because as we all know all the resources that we are depending on, will not be able to support our increasing demand for electricity in future. it is wise for us to go for nuclear, which has more higher reliability.

    jivithan a/l kandeeban
    jiviremo@yahoo.com
    me083555

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Nuclear energy together with other renewable energy sources"...that i agree. Like the facts given by our blogger, fossil fuels are indeed depleting..and the carbon emission generated by these energy sources will INDEED increase if we keep on depending on them for our energy needs. Causing all types of calamities, Global Warming, pollution, and somewhat.. Unless someone discovers fusion technology, the only viable alternative, in terms of energy efficiency and clean environmental impact..is by far going nuclear. But that shouldn't stop us from pursuing other alternative sources..such as solar or biomass. We should consider these sources to be utilized in a sustainable manner.
    For sustainable, i mean using all these sources together,nuclear and non-nuclear..pooling all the energy gained, and distributing them to areas most needed depending on energy demands. In other words, not making nuclear energy as the number one source for energy.But then, this is just an opinion from me, a university student...only those in this expertise know better. :D

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree with Lim Chee Keong.. we must to move on to nuclear power as soon as posible because of the depletion of our natural resource.. we need to take quick action to prevent other problems in the future.

    muhammad fikri bin baharudin
    fiq.bahar@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  13. Not surprisingly, the nuclear renaissance on this power-starved planet is not without debate. How it all plays out will surely provide some interesting opportunities for investors.

    Nuclear power promises to displace the naughty carbon-producing plants, such as those that burn coal and oil, with a cleaner energy source for decades to come. That could mean less demand for fossil fuels and more for uranium, the fuel most widely used by reactors for nuclear fission. It almost certainly will mean increased consumption of some of the metals and steel that go into the construction of the gigantic nuclear reactors.

    Muhammad Sadiq Bin Anipah
    ME083602
    sadiqanipah@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  14. There are various factors why Malaysians will not want nuclear energy, one of which is the funding and the other one is the environmental issues. I agree that nuclear is a green energy, but if you look at it during the mining process, it can be hazardous to the miners and the towns surrounding the mining areas. Another problem is the fact that when the wastes are buried underground, problems of intrusions may occur, the radioactive wastes can intrude into our underground water and thus poisoning our underwater supply, don't get me wrong, I am more than happy to see nuclear being implemented in our country, I really wanted to know that before it is introduced, all of this factors are considered as a potential problem that needs to be solved before anything is done.

    Muhamad Rifdy Bin Samsudin
    CE083444
    ed_dy12@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes,it's time for a change,because of the use of depleting resources and also to reduce of our impact on mother earth.Besides the fact,if we start now only will we get it set up by 10-15 years time.

    OM GAJENDRA KUMARAN
    ME083617
    ogk_om@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  16. "very simple reactor could be a possible way to supply heat economically."

    i agreed with this statement..
    as for the first step of this energy source, we can operate on a very simple plant..

    see the benefits, if it is the best for people, next step on modification the plant can be made..
    go green go!

    KHAIRUL AZZAM BIN MAZLAN
    ME083561
    whizz42243_kid@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  17. i support entirely on the fact that nuclear energy is safe,and we should definatly utilise it in the near future so that we can save millions and save our remaining source of fuels
    Dinesh
    me083537

    ReplyDelete
  18. There are solution . People in Woking, England had been using tri-generation plant and they save up alot in energy and water usage. I dont know the exact figure but I think its around 50% to 70% saving. I'm shocked that nobody pay attention to what had been done there.so as a an architect we should know a whole bag of ways to reduce our energy usage. All that is needed are people to listen.

    khuzaimi bin kamaruddin
    acai_otai@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am agree with the nuclear power demand in our current situation. Malaysia has to move on to nuclear power as soon as posible because of the depletion of our natural resources. Plus, we are affected by the price hike of fossil fuel and trust me, the cost of fossil fuel will get higher and higher in the coming years.

    nurul najiah hashim
    me083972
    nurul.najiah@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete
  20. Izzatun Nadia ME086266October 26, 2010 at 2:00 AM

    i agreed with nuclear energy but at the same time i doubt about it. Although nuclear energy give a lot of power source n everything,and there are ways to clean the nuclear waste but how about the impact of the nuclear waste and radiation to the environment? How about our country neighbour point of view? if malaysia really wanted to establish the nuclear energy,i hope the will be zero negative impact to our environment and our country.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hydrogen is certainly a good source of clean energy because by-product only water, but the process to produce hydrogen is not that clean.
    Besides, to produce one fuel cell car cost around RM 4M(NISSAN X-TRAIL FCV). It will cost around RM 1M for mass-production.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Toy,
    True, but the hydrogen itself cannot be as the fuel replacement for coals, diesels etc. For your information, this hydrogen only assists the combustion.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Now what? still living in your dream. look at what happen Japan. Are you still stand firm with you all statement. A notion with such a well develop skill is facing this kind of massive trouble. I just couldn't imagine what happen if Malaysia is facing the similar situation. The explode also happen in Ukraine... What is the consequences? The entire area is abundant with countless number of babies carrying radiation poison and, death.

    What reasons for us to Justify the nuke project? Just because of you think that you know everything about it.. Please keep this commend with yourselves and don't ever risk the community...

    ReplyDelete