Renewable Energy: Lots of Parameters to Consider

Part of the challenge in favoring one energy-related technology over another is that there are so many parameters that affect the calculation. Obviously, it needs to be “clean,” in terms of CO2 and the active poisons: oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, heavy metals, radioactive isotopes, etc.  If we didn’t care about that, there would be no point in having the conversation in the first place; we have plenty of coal to last us hundreds of years.

Another obvious factor is cost.  As 2GreenEnergy “Associate” Dr. Peter Lilienthal (pictured) is fond of saying, “If you don’t care how much you pay for it, I’ll get you all the clean energy you need to power our civilization five times over.”  But, of course, we care very much about what we pay for it.

Occasionally, we encounter this parameter:  How much room does it occupy?  This is normally brought up by proponents of nuclear energy who wish to show a positive comparison to solar and wind as low-carbon forms of energy.  My colleague Dr. Alex Canarra provides a telling slide on the subject. It’s true that nuclear has a tiny footprint in terms of real estate (as does coal). Looking at solar, we see that it takes more room, though I’m not sure that’s the end of the world for PV and CSP (concentrated solar power) advocates.  It IS the end of the world for the biofuels people, coupled with the water use issue.  This shows the value of algae, which can be grown with seawater on non-arable land.

Overall, I would rank land-use fairly low on the list of priorities.  There are 3.5 million square miles in the continental U.S alone, most of which is extremely sparsely populated.