Shinnar and Citro make an interesting point.......
In a Science Policy Forum article entitled "A Road Map to US Decarbonization", (available in part in the Energy Bulletin) Reuel Shinnar and Francesco Citro point out that while nuclear is well suited to support baseload electricity generation, solar is ideal for handling peak demand, being most available, when most needed, during the hot days.
Eli may not buy much of the detailed optimism with respect to concentrated solar thermal, but their bottom line for CO2 limited electrical generation is $170 - 200 billion/year to replace 70% of fossil fuel use
Posts
2 comments:
In the energybulletin summary Shinnary and Citro say new and safer nuclear designs, not yet built on a commercial scale, merit construction as if PWRs, BWRs, and heavy water reactors had at some time harmed some neighbour. They have not, and also merit construction.
Had they in fact ever harmed a customer or third party, they might still merit construction, as long as they had done less harm than the carbon-emitting power stations and local furnaces whose replacement by them is supposedly being road-mapped. They could have done a lot more harm without exceeding that mark.
--- G. R. L. Cowan, boron combustion fan
Burn boron in pure oxygen for vehicle power
> 2006 ...
> as if ....
2011: oops.
Post a Comment