SI
SI
discoversearch

Non-Tech : Alternative energy

 Public Reply | Prvt Reply | Mark as Last Read | FilePrevious 10 | Next 10 | Previous | Next  
To: Jerry in Omaha who wrote (106)5/10/2001 11:00:28 AM
From: InvestormanRead Replies (1) of 15267
 
Interesting information on the tide generator. The cost of producing the power is important if the technology is expected to be adopted. For comparison purposes the costs of other means of generation need to be considered. Hydroelectric is the cheapest but there isn't much room for increasing this output. Coal plants are currently running about 2.5 cents per Kw hour, natural gas about 4 cents per Kw hour, solar heat operated stirling engines about 5.5 cents per Kw hour and nuclear is quoted at 1.5 cents per Kw hour but that doesn't include enviromental reclamitation of the mined areas or disposal of spent fuel. When those are included it is approx. 8 cents per Kw hour. Photovoltaic isn't competitive at this stage of technology. Fuel cells still have some major engineering hurdles to overcome so an estimate of their costs isn't really possible yet. Geothermal is cheap but has limitations on where they can be installed; but in those areas will probably be the best alternative in the next decade or two. The tidal generator is interesting if it is practical since the US has a lot of coastline available.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public Reply | Prvt Reply | Mark as Last Read | FilePrevious 10 | Next 10 | Previous | Next  

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.