tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73153867631984610002024-02-19T22:52:28.232-08:00Just becauseAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-19735646819747281852015-06-04T20:33:00.001-07:002015-06-04T21:35:10.005-07:00Demand Response - The Not so Holy Grail of Renewable EnergyThe variability (i.e. the sun isn't always shining and the wind isn't always blowing) of wind and solar is a big problem, which is why cheap, scalable and efficient energy storage is often called the holy grail of renewable energy, and with good reason.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1-tBbXdYEZZOzxCHc15qvNnFS9SpU4tkrzr3jp5nqhT93UVWFo4UINWU1yGwD9Besj23_kwRZ12al5n5B0Sr9r33OsAOmsWTzqypxghBacXgCmbnfotYxZags-cx80m-HiPWB2zyMS5U/s1600/GodAnimated.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1-tBbXdYEZZOzxCHc15qvNnFS9SpU4tkrzr3jp5nqhT93UVWFo4UINWU1yGwD9Besj23_kwRZ12al5n5B0Sr9r33OsAOmsWTzqypxghBacXgCmbnfotYxZags-cx80m-HiPWB2zyMS5U/s320/GodAnimated.gif" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Que the inspiring music.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Indeed if such a thing existed I wouldn't feel so concerned about the future and as a consequence would probably not be writing blog posts about energy, but I'm not going to be talking about energy storage with this post. Instead I'm going to be talking about demand response the... well lets call it the not so holy grail of renewable energy.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIKsuCwBlogIyD6r_hQR5Lnz1TOGC3mPr6G99wbH5ilcqqSQTNjkkaXCLIG0UH1mtHDm9_yrKXnNgk-bW9_3TLxMd90DJ5cZ9JjEV8eSs4lB3gbf2CuSgmPkPM0d_2OOZZCCoxU_ZPEqc/s1600/Untitled.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIKsuCwBlogIyD6r_hQR5Lnz1TOGC3mPr6G99wbH5ilcqqSQTNjkkaXCLIG0UH1mtHDm9_yrKXnNgk-bW9_3TLxMd90DJ5cZ9JjEV8eSs4lB3gbf2CuSgmPkPM0d_2OOZZCCoxU_ZPEqc/s320/Untitled.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It comes with one of those little umbrellas. How bad could it be?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Perhaps I'm being a tad over dramatic here. Demand response just means for people or businesses to stop using electricity when the utilities want them to. I'm not against demand response on principle. It could help save a lot of money. My problem is that the people pushing for this the most are wind and solar advocates who want to help match demand to the wind and sun. If they want to use this to make our demand match in that way they are going to have get control over large part of people's lives.<br />
<br />
As I see it there are two major issues that need to be considered. One is that demand response for households creates the risk of electricity rationing which would likely have a larger effect on poor people. This both posses an issue of social justice, and an issue over a reduction in the benefit that people get from 24/7/365 electricity. Being able to flip a switch to create light wherever you need it is one of the best things about modern life. Losing such utility is not something that should be taken lightly. I mean do we really want to live our lives at the mercy of the weather and seasons?<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBxcSOiJix46Kbjuo_G46nuCjhbyspteDDQ1MZs9nwoXR3J6K5O6Ke9iWHLfRzgRwlnW8487xAivXI_LvjSjvojRwGdC1kEwtCvHTzBMXRyH9xUBESYs-9UeNA5lqgcOTB5TSIlJmz5hw/s1600/Cold-Woman.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBxcSOiJix46Kbjuo_G46nuCjhbyspteDDQ1MZs9nwoXR3J6K5O6Ke9iWHLfRzgRwlnW8487xAivXI_LvjSjvojRwGdC1kEwtCvHTzBMXRyH9xUBESYs-9UeNA5lqgcOTB5TSIlJmz5hw/s320/Cold-Woman.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'd love to turn up the thermostat, but today isn't very windy or sunny. As a ration consumer I have to respond to price signals. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Another issues has to do with manufacturing and the price of stuff. Some of the cost of manufacturing is in the form of costs that don't vary by the amount that is made. These costs are refereed to as fixed costs. An example of fixed cost for a factory would be machinery or the building. These are things that have to get paid for regardless of how much the factory produces. If you produces a lot then the fixed cost gets divided up between all the stuff you've made and fixed costs becomes less per unit produced. <br />
<br />
Imagination that you had a fixed cost of 5,000,000. If you produced only a single item then the fixed cost for that product would be 5,000,000. If you produced 5,000,000 items then the fixed cost for each of those items would be one dollar. <br />
<br />
It's easy to see that the effect fixed costs have on the cost of producing an item can vary a great deal. With that in mind imagine that you had two identical factories. The only difference is that one factor operates 24 hours a day and the other factory is solar power so it only operates when it's sunny enough. Let's say the solar power factory operates 20 percent of the time. From this we can tell that the fixed cost for items produced by the solar powered factory will be 5 times more than the fixed cost for items from the factor that runs 24 hours a day. Depending on what's being made that could be a substantial difference. Also, some manufacturing processes can't be stopped in the middle and taken up again whenever it's convenient because doing so would damage machinery and/or wasted materials, time and other resources. <br />
<br />
After reading all this you might think I'm against demand response, but that isn't true. Demand response could be useful, just not for matching electricity use to the wind and sun. The best use of the technology would be to make up for small seasonal, and peak electric use, variations. For example it would make a lot more sense to shut down a factory (one that can take that kind of start and stop) for 5 hours a year then it would be to build a natural gas plant (and all it's required pipelines and power lines) that is only needed for 5 hours a year. At any rate weather this article changes you mind about anything I hope it at least makes you think. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTsOTVtF67RZlO60SEsFrWBKYZXmEgyWQimtLsV6abpwYZjygmGX6TBvAjjNgErDh2iqt8AeCSnQ9N8f8NcfNET6yYE_CV71YWXkcIIheMkiYEYcNg6wfVUfa-PEG4AzY3x-ouRGM6kZY/s1600/bye+bye.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTsOTVtF67RZlO60SEsFrWBKYZXmEgyWQimtLsV6abpwYZjygmGX6TBvAjjNgErDh2iqt8AeCSnQ9N8f8NcfNET6yYE_CV71YWXkcIIheMkiYEYcNg6wfVUfa-PEG4AzY3x-ouRGM6kZY/s1600/bye+bye.png" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small; text-align: start;">Until next article.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-76675993114357618272015-03-11T10:39:00.000-07:002015-03-14T08:47:52.321-07:00Just how Safe are Fossil Fuels, Wind, Solar and Nuclear Power?This article I'm going to compare safety for different form of electric generation. Lets start with the energy deathprints.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Energy’s Deathprint</b></span><br />
<br />
Energy's deathprint is a rarely talked about measure of the number of deaths per unit of energy produced for different power sources. Here are the results from two studies on it.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia0Ef8Oy-wYNfRVs7uhccNXRtcAeDAyR8W44GoY1h28IqDEshd74XGsxvbDceNQmqFiZEx4rllwvPE7UIg41pvP7aYCbIhCMiujq7xZwp_rEgUI6QPsL_hby5KElxMaU9dsZn2aPaup7A/s1600/DeathPrintUK.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia0Ef8Oy-wYNfRVs7uhccNXRtcAeDAyR8W44GoY1h28IqDEshd74XGsxvbDceNQmqFiZEx4rllwvPE7UIg41pvP7aYCbIhCMiujq7xZwp_rEgUI6QPsL_hby5KElxMaU9dsZn2aPaup7A/s1600/DeathPrintUK.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From page 168 <a href="http://www.withouthotair.com/download.html">Sustainable energy without the hot air</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
As you can see coal, oil and biomass are particularly bad. This is because of small particles released while burning thing (i.e. ash or fly ash). These don't agree with people very much. Not only do these particles cause deaths, but they also cause other health problems. Some countries do a better job of filtering them out then others. With a bit of searching you can find info for a variety of similar studies. <a href="http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/03/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sources.html">Here</a> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/">is</a> another one. I thought <a href="http://www.nuceng.ca/refer/risk/risk.htm">this review</a> of it was particularly insightful. <span style="font-size: large;"><b></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Carbon Foot<span style="font-size: large;">p</span>rints </b></span><br />
<br />
Global Warming is a serious issue. <a href="http://news.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/co-010908.html">One study</a> projects that...<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Worldwide, upward of 20,000 air-pollution-related deaths per year per degree Celsius may be due to this greenhouse gas.</blockquote>
That's rather extrema considering how long the temperature changes are projected to last. Here is a graph that shows the carbon footprint for various forms of electric generation. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCLeKhIkk7PQ7kNU1QowJ08eOQAOUr_tNfuVzBo_TGpqrHsHTj2bmc3A1yIEqZ3Bbd7rjE9VsyALrSR4A_bT0qJHTXty2p_F2fbv4oktxt4YrmAdcSeh0ClwVXxfyymPh03rZIvy9KPSc/s1600/World+Carbon+Footprints+EG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCLeKhIkk7PQ7kNU1QowJ08eOQAOUr_tNfuVzBo_TGpqrHsHTj2bmc3A1yIEqZ3Bbd7rjE9VsyALrSR4A_bT0qJHTXty2p_F2fbv4oktxt4YrmAdcSeh0ClwVXxfyymPh03rZIvy9KPSc/s1600/World+Carbon+Footprints+EG.jpg" height="216" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From <a href="http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/library/technical-articles/carbon-capture/parliamentary-office-of-science-and-technology/carbon-footprint-of-electricity-generation/file_9270.pdf">Carbon footprint of electricity generation</a> by Stephanie Baldwin</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The units for the graph are gCO^2eq /kwh.<br />
<br />
From page 8 of Carbon footprint of electric generation. I suggest reading the whole PDF. It's not very long, and definitely worth it. <br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Ranges in each electricity generation technology are due to</b><br />
<ol>
<li>Differences between individual plants – some older and/or less efficient<br /> </li>
<li>Different technologies – e.g. run-of-river vs. reservoir storage<br /> </li>
<li>Different LCA input (boundary definition) parameters<br /> </li>
<li>Different studies – some studies older, so had older data (2000 was cutoff date)</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br />
In regards to the difference for nuclear power. From page 18 of Carbon footprint of electric generation.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b> Issues: </b><br />
<ol>
<li>Nuclear also has a very small carbon footprint </li>
<li>Most CO 2 emitted during uranium mining (40% of life cycle CO2) </li>
<li>Global uranium reserves – lower grades may cause footprint to rise in future </li>
<li>3 studies: AEA ( to 6.8g), Öko ( to 30-60g), Storm van Leeuwin ( 60 to 120g)</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
I would like to add to this that there are two important issues for understand nuclear power's carbon footprint. One is the method of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium">fuel enrichment</a>. Some have a bigger carbon footprint than others. The other is the type of reactor. Some reactors are able to use much more of the natural uranium mined then other which reduces their carbon footprint. I'm really hopping we will start making more <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor">breeder reactors</a> so we can use all of it. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Radioisotopes Released into the Environment </b></span><br />
<br />
I'll just give a brief description for coal, natural gas and nuclear power that will hopefully give you some idea about the <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRadionuclide&ei=ZjblVIvBKsfwoASzqYCACg&usg=AFQjCNH5fMEznNckCdZi-73xxHsGiJ8-2Q&sig2=v0uPXrdyOOQuruvJ137_Ug&bvm=bv.86475890,d.cGU">radioisotopes</a> (i.e. the stuff that produces radiation) they release into the environment. For your information sometimes when people in the news talk about radiation they are talking about radioisotopes and sometimes they are talking about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation">ionizing radiation</a>. If you’re not familiar with these concepts you may wish to read my post <a href="http://ratdog-justbecause.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-basic-information-usful-for.html">Some Basic Information Useful for Understanding Nuclear Power Safety</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>Radioisotopes and fossil fuels </b><br />
<br />
There are radioisotopes mixed into almost everything. This includes fossil fuels. When you burn the fossil fuels these radioisotopes become more concentrated (in the ash) then they are in the natural environment. This can result in people having more radiation exposure then they would otherwise. <br />
<br />
<b>Radioisotopes Released by Coal</b>
<br />
<br />
The main radiation release from coal is in the form of fly ash. In order to give you some idea about what this entails let me start out with a few quotes.<br />
<br />
From the <a href="http://www.usgs.gov/">USGS</a> - <a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html">Radioactive Elements in Coal and Fly Ash: Abundance, Forms, and Environmental Significance </a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Introduction</b><br />
Coal is largely composed of organic matter, but it is the inorganic matter in coal—minerals and trace elements— that have been cited as possible causes of health, environmental, and technological problems associated with the use of coal. Some trace elements in coal are naturally radioactive. These radioactive elements include <b>uranium</b> (U), <b>thorium</b> (Th), and their numerous decay products, including <b>radium</b> (Ra) and <b>radon</b> (Rn). Although these elements are less chemically toxic than other coal constituents such as <b>arsenic</b>, <b>selenium</b>, or <b>mercury</b>, questions have been raised concerning possible risk from radiation. In order to accurately address these questions and to predict the mobility of radioactive elements during the coal fuel-cycle, it is important to determine the concentration, distribution, and form of radioactive elements in coal and fly ash.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Emphasis Added </span></b></blockquote>
<br />
10-30 <a href="http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ppm-d_1039.html">ppm</a> uranium in fly ash<br />
<br />
10-30 ppm thorium in fly ash<br />
<br />
From the EPA - <a href="http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/coalandcoalash.html">Coal Fly Ash, Bottom Ash and Boiler Slag</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In 2012, 59 percent of the coal consumed by electric utilities and independent power producers in the United States resulted in the generation of about <b>68 million tons of fly ash</b>, bottom ash and boiler slag. An additional 42 million tons of other residuals were generated from flue gas desulfurization and fluidized bed combustion.<br />
<br />
Fly ash is carried up with hot flue gases and trapped by stack filters. It is the largest of the coal combustion residuals (<b>about half</b>) by weight.<br />
<br />
Stack filtration devices, such as electrostatic precipitators, baghouses and scrubbers are routinely used to reduce the emission of fly ash. They are about <b>99 percent effective</b>. Only about one percent is released into the air.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="font-size: x-small;">Emphasis Added </span></b></blockquote>
<b>Now lets do a little math with these numbers.</b><br />
<br />
68,000,000 tons * <span style="font-family: Arial;">50%</span> * 1% = 340,000 tons<br />
<br />
So, in 2012, 59 percent of the coal consumed by electric utilities resulted in 340,000 tons of fly ash being released into the air.<br />
<br />
((340,000 tons * 10ppm) / 1,000,000) * 2,000 lb./tons = 6,800 pounds*<br />
<br />
((340,000 tons * 30 ppm) / 1,000,000) * 2,000 lb./ton = 20,400 pounds*<br />
<br />
*assuming tons is short tons and ppm is a mass fraction.<br />
<br />
<b>Extrapolating for the other 41% we get...</b><br />
<br />
6,800 lb / .59 ≃ 12,000 pounds<br />
20,400 lb / .59 ≃ 35,000 pounds <br />
<br />
So in 2012, we had roughly between 12,000 and 35,000 pounds of radioactive uranium and roughly between 12,000 and 35,000 pounds of radioactive Thorium being released into the air by electric utilities resulted. If it wasn’t for the consumption of coal in production electricity this Thorium and Uranium would have remained under ground where it couldn’t possibly hurt anyone. Instead it was released into the air in the form of small particles which often end up the the lungs of people and animals. <br />
<br />
<b>Now lets talk about Radon </b> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon">Radon</a> is a colourless odorless gas that is responsible for a large part of people's yearly radiation dose from natural sources. So let try and figure out how much radon is release from a years worth of coal.<br />
<br />
In the Us <span class="formula-content"><span class=" string " dir="auto"><a href="http://www.eia.gov/beta/coal/data/browser/#/topic/20?agg=1,0&geo=vvvvvvvvvvvvo&sec=g&freq=A&start=2008&end=2013&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0">858,000,000 Short tons</a> of coal a burnt each year. There is around <a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html">1 to 3 parts per million</a> uranium in Us coal. So there is between 858 and 2574 tons of uranium </span></span><span class="formula-content"><span class=" string " dir="auto"><span class="formula-content"><span class=" string " dir="auto">in a years worth of coal</span></span>. </span></span><br />
<br />
Assuming that the amount of uranium has stayed basically constant over
the years, that none of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decay_chain">decay chain</a> products have left the coal and that
the decay products move through the chain at roughly the same speed (all fairly safe assumption to make), then the Radon produced each year by the coal equals the uranium 238 that decays
each year.<br />
<br />
<b>So between...</b><br />
<br />
(9,600 Gd/sec X 3.15569e7 sec. / <span class="nowrap">6.022<span style="margin-left: .25em;">1</span>41<span style="margin-left: .25em;">2</span>9<span style="margin-left: 0.25em; margin-right: 0.15em;">×</span>10<sup>23</sup></span>) X 222 ≃ .<b>11Grams</b><br />
decays a sec in a year 1 Mole mass Rn-222<br />
<br />
<br />
(29,000 Gd/sec X 3.15569e7 sec. / <span class="nowrap">6.022<span style="margin-left: .25em;">1</span>41<span style="margin-left: .25em;">2</span>9<span style="margin-left: 0.25em; margin-right: 0.15em;">×</span>10<sup>23</sup></span> ) X 222 ≃ <b>.23 Grams</b><br />
decays a sec in a year 1 Mole mass Rn-222<br />
<br />
<br />
So a years worth of coal in America creates around .11 to .23 grams or <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-m8C6VxBdbbBJED389_XHFHKH1XRlacoJwm_FnKdrQ4/edit#gid=476669848">590 to 1,800 TBq </a>of radioactive gas. Of course this says nothing about where it's released, and it also says nothing about the addition Rn-222 that it will continue to released from the coal ash ponds for years to come.<br />
<br />
<b>So should we all panic and run for the hills? </b><br />
<br />
Probably not.<br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html">first source</a>.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The radiation hazard from airborne emissions of coal-fired power plants was evaluated in a series of studies conducted from 1975–1985. These studies concluded that the maximum radiation dose to an individual living within 1 km of a modern power plant is equivalent to a minor, perhaps 1 to 5 percent.</blockquote>
From a more <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/">recent study</a>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
McBride and his co-authors estimated that individuals living near
coal-fired installations are exposed to a maximum of 1.9 millirems of
fly ash radiation yearly. To put these numbers in perspective, the
average person encounters 360 millirems of annual "background radiation"
from natural and man-made sources, including substances in Earth's
crust, cosmic rays, residue from nuclear tests and smoke detectors.</blockquote>
<br />
There are a lot of radioisotopes in the coal all the Us burns each year, but not all of it ever reaches the public (Most fly ash is captured and stored), Radon-222 has a half life of only 3.8 days so it's unlikely to get to far plus it will quickly be diluted in as it spreads out from the plant and also the radio isotopes in coal aren't that concentrated to begin with although burning it makes them somewhat more so. <br />
<br />
<b>Radioisotopes Released by Natural Gas</b><br />
<br />
I know what you're thinking. They couldn't possible pump radioactive gas into our homes right? Well...<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It has been known for over 40 years that radon, a radioactive gas, is present in natural gas. Reports by R.H. Johnson 7 and C.V. Gogolak 8 calculate the health effects due to burning natural gas in kitchen stoves and space heaters. In an US Environmental Protection Agency report, Raymond Johnson calculate s the number of lung cancer deaths due to inhalation of radon in homes throughout the U.S. as 95 due to radon concentrations in the pipeline of 37 pCi/L. </blockquote>
<br />
Yikes. By the way that quote came from <a href="http://energyindepth.org/wp-content/uploads/marcellus/2012/04/Resnikoff.pdf">this study</a> that estimates the problem is much worse in New York because of gas from the Marcellus <span class="highlight selected">shale. It estimates that the gas from the </span><span class="highlight selected">Marcellus <span class="highlight selected">shale</span> raises the death toll by </span>1,182 to 30,448 a year. That is a significant number. <a href="http://energyindepth.org/marcellus/radon-rhetoric-of-anti-expert-on-natural-gas-rejected/">Here is</a> a blog post contesting that study. Unfortunately neither the study or the blog post that contests it have actual measurements from the Marcellus <span class="highlight selected">shale well heads. Something you would think someone would want to take.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="highlight selected">While this all sounds scary it should be noted that there is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model#Controversy">controversy</a> in regards to the effect of low level radiation. </span><br />
<br />
<b>Radioisotopes Released by Nuclear Power</b><br />
<br />
Here is an awesome graphic that explains it all.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2FwgON5u4SO01m8GCGciaq8pHorHXB09Y82eFdxLvRljGoh1NiWEga6cBny-UkhE80ihoVn-HtgkDZ-0vLYUbn703-ifJZBxO5nWX2InAZh05cqbE3n4-uORRZdUgiQpL3CrwWvmPC2M/s1600/radiation.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2FwgON5u4SO01m8GCGciaq8pHorHXB09Y82eFdxLvRljGoh1NiWEga6cBny-UkhE80ihoVn-HtgkDZ-0vLYUbn703-ifJZBxO5nWX2InAZh05cqbE3n4-uORRZdUgiQpL3CrwWvmPC2M/s1600/radiation.png" height="640" width="544" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Source <a href="http://xkcd.com/radiation/">http://xkcd.com/radiation/</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Conclusion</b></span><br />
<br />
There isn't one really. I hope learned something and you enjoyed it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTsOTVtF67RZlO60SEsFrWBKYZXmEgyWQimtLsV6abpwYZjygmGX6TBvAjjNgErDh2iqt8AeCSnQ9N8f8NcfNET6yYE_CV71YWXkcIIheMkiYEYcNg6wfVUfa-PEG4AzY3x-ouRGM6kZY/s1600/bye+bye.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTsOTVtF67RZlO60SEsFrWBKYZXmEgyWQimtLsV6abpwYZjygmGX6TBvAjjNgErDh2iqt8AeCSnQ9N8f8NcfNET6yYE_CV71YWXkcIIheMkiYEYcNg6wfVUfa-PEG4AzY3x-ouRGM6kZY/s1600/bye+bye.png" /></a></div>
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-40446618848777278862015-03-10T11:15:00.000-07:002015-03-11T11:10:00.490-07:00The Impending Solar Energy Bubble and What can be Done to Stop it<div dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-28dcf352-04dc-4aba-ecce-18f9d5c864d6" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The
compensation people receive for their excess electricity should not be
allowed to cause other people's rates to go up. If it does the situation
will be inequitable and will in essence be a tax on the poor to the
benefit of the better off. In order to insure this doesn’t happen the
amount people receive for excess electricity must not exceed the
reduction in the total electric system costs that their excess
electricity results in. </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-28dcf352-04dc-4aba-ecce-18f9d5c864d6" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The
system needed to deliver us power 24 hours a day 365 day a year is
composed of a number of different parts. All of those parts have costs
that need to be paid in order to keep the lights on. So logically if
solar electricity is lowering the cost of power for other people then it
must reduce the need for some of those parts or reduce maintenance
costs. The real question is how much does it really do this. Solar
panels can only really be counted on for the amount of power they
produced on a cloudy day on the winter solstice. Some places have snow
so even less than that. Basically in many parts of the world solar
panels don’t reduce the need for other equipment at all (it depends a
lot on how close the the equator you are). </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCIWb2y1HQK3C8Arz2ajUZVhx8F9gK-MIa0XWy4NumTE3xrmIByCxMAbziB3KQQWDFBsGYQzE0EfxmRLB61q4Ctc9uKoOMesVAw_mbWyrucpK6iYeX6suyUd-GhWLaiJcoqJrPvUL3rRE/s1600/output.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCIWb2y1HQK3C8Arz2ajUZVhx8F9gK-MIa0XWy4NumTE3xrmIByCxMAbziB3KQQWDFBsGYQzE0EfxmRLB61q4Ctc9uKoOMesVAw_mbWyrucpK6iYeX6suyUd-GhWLaiJcoqJrPvUL3rRE/s1600/output.jpg" height="247" width="320" /></a></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Some people argue that
solar reduces wear on equipment other argue it damages and increases
wear on equipment because of its sporadic nature, and it requires costly
upgrades to the grid. Who know weather overall it decreases or
increases the system costs from wear. It probably varies by
circumstance. A lot more work needs to be done studying this. </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Basically
the way I see it in places like Germany (i.e. places that get almost no
energy from solar for part of the year) solar only reduces the need for
coal and natural gas so people should only be compensated for the
amount of coal and natural gas not burned because of the electricity
they produced, but I imagine that few people would take the word of a
random person on the internet for this. That is why there is the need
for a competent impartial independent third party to look at all the
evidence and reach a decision they feel is in the best interest of all
electric customers.</span></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">If
this isn’t done right there is the potential for a huge bubble. People
doing all kinds of creative things financially in regards to solar and
net metering. If I am correct and people are just shuffling the costs
around then things will become strained as more and more people are
forced to get solar because of the increasing electric rate. Obviously
this is unsustainable. Everyone cannot pass the costs off onto someone
else and the poor can’t shoulder the entire burden themselves.
Something has to give eventually. </span>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-56509121175625099682015-03-06T10:39:00.000-08:002015-03-06T19:10:15.870-08:00The Problem with Net MeteringIn the better off parts of the world most people enjoy the benefits of electricity on demand 24 hour a day 365 days a year. If you are reading this you most likely do as well. Pretty much all of us (us being the lucky ones) are customers, but not all of us are producers. In the past producing your own electricity was rarely practical. Now day thing are different. Now solar systems exists at prices in many people's reach. This has created a new issue that needs to be addressed. That issue is what compensation should people receive for putting their excess electric production on the grid.<br />
<br />
In the Us right now a policy (or rather a series of similar policies) called <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/27/business/energy-environment/utilities-confront-fresh-threat-do-it-yourself-power.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2">net metering</a> determines what they get. Net metering basically means they can sell electricity back to the grid for the same price they would buy it for. Currently it exists in 42 states although there are policy differences. Here is a map from <a href="http://www.freeingthegrid.org/">www.freeingthegrid.org</a> which lists the states that have it along with a grade for how good they think the net metering laws are in that state.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioclf2UlW2upeZWIp5RHgEDaejbUcu0vTK1jfIXJvgwQWoIg2VFj-BIu0faF0AHlz623_hZRhrd5Y4bSIK_F2hCNI4V65QcJUxLS7NdMV-zYcIelP7_TtBzsthaNMTmkS6orUGF7_Nh8M/s1600/freeing-the-grid-state-nem-policies.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioclf2UlW2upeZWIp5RHgEDaejbUcu0vTK1jfIXJvgwQWoIg2VFj-BIu0faF0AHlz623_hZRhrd5Y4bSIK_F2hCNI4V65QcJUxLS7NdMV-zYcIelP7_TtBzsthaNMTmkS6orUGF7_Nh8M/s1600/freeing-the-grid-state-nem-policies.png" height="153" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
With net metering it's possible for people to bring their electric bill <a href="http://www.solarworld-usa.com/solar-for-home/home-solar-faqs">down to zero</a> with only a small grid connection fee needing to be paid each year.<br />
<br />
It's pretty easy to see what the problem is here. Imagine what would happen if everyone did it. If everyone brought their electric bill down to zero who would pay for the electric service they would all still be using during the night time, when it cloudy or a times during winter. They would all essentially be using service without paying for it which obviously wouldn't work. Now imagine if half the people did it. Half the people aren't paying for the electric service leading the other half to foot the bill. This is inequitable and it gets worse if you think about little more. The half of the people able to afford the solar system and having to space to install them will be the better off people. The poor people living in apartments would end up footing a larger part of the bill. This is simply not right.<br />
<br />
People putting solar on their roof is a choice and the amount of money they receive for their excess electricity should not increase or decrease other people electric bill. In order to make this happen I propose that their needs to be an impartial independent regulatory body that examines all the evidence and determines what the proper compensation should be. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-19998001519412259902015-02-10T19:54:00.000-08:002015-02-12T20:16:40.727-08:00I'm Going to go Tour Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant TomorrowI'm going to go tour <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_Canyon_Power_Plant">Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant</a> tomorrow. Looking up things about nuclear power I found out tours are available, and I thought it would be kind of cool to see a nuclear power plant with my own eyes. When I get back I'll edit this post adding how it went... <br />
<br />
I had a lot of fun. I got there a little early. Waited about 20 minutes until it opened. I started of at a visitor center called the PG&E Energy Education Center. I started by looking around at the exhibits. Here is a replica fuel assembly that I thought was neat.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhi4ei0lUo38tUFzhbjbIyIiDOlmvjn1riO_SfL43e8OeYxLyi4ogb9eLfGlJu004QMAsmSRbxehfD2LriAgts6QuPlD13uyBm0Wu0OoOqOPqar50H0Ni8anjXjjxbZh9laOo_SMmXMwUA/s1600/Fuel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhi4ei0lUo38tUFzhbjbIyIiDOlmvjn1riO_SfL43e8OeYxLyi4ogb9eLfGlJu004QMAsmSRbxehfD2LriAgts6QuPlD13uyBm0Wu0OoOqOPqar50H0Ni8anjXjjxbZh9laOo_SMmXMwUA/s1600/Fuel.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Unfortunately I'm not so great a photography. After I looked around a little they had a lecture. Most of it stuff I already know, but one interesting fact is that Fukushima was only 20 feet above sea level, while Diablo Canyon is 85 feet above sea level. Quit the difference. The lecture left me with a nifty souvenir.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlGBs6gq_pydAbXID3H-aXeiBlV53-R5Cw1FwfgsumSLoIF2Rruhvp5k9cVzkt7f3_zLupLw2VsGD_LhwaKunahfYFXBVd-5RRh8TJ-KxQTp7fHnK7Z3ZMcNudKegH3VmYX24n6weSnOE/s1600/Fuel+Pellet.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlGBs6gq_pydAbXID3H-aXeiBlV53-R5Cw1FwfgsumSLoIF2Rruhvp5k9cVzkt7f3_zLupLw2VsGD_LhwaKunahfYFXBVd-5RRh8TJ-KxQTp7fHnK7Z3ZMcNudKegH3VmYX24n6weSnOE/s1600/Fuel+Pellet.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Its a plastic replica fuel pellet. On it is written that it is the equivalent of 149 gallons of oil, one ton of coal or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. Rather nicely done I thought.<br />
<br />
After that we drove to the plant. They didn't let me take any pictures inside the plant, but I was allowed to take this one outside it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjc_wIg_PkC4t7VCaFuMzytmdLkRVsbWK1TOnku4ca5h_h5CJ6Qf0w0aF3f-W1nZzk1WOkptxpTGN6wGz-U2dciXlt_EY34q1cUHtIloCGce0R8jPK8BMQU9Za1eAjL0tGaIBVQR04q52k/s1600/Plant.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjc_wIg_PkC4t7VCaFuMzytmdLkRVsbWK1TOnku4ca5h_h5CJ6Qf0w0aF3f-W1nZzk1WOkptxpTGN6wGz-U2dciXlt_EY34q1cUHtIloCGce0R8jPK8BMQU9Za1eAjL0tGaIBVQR04q52k/s1600/Plant.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Security was really tight. I didn't know nuclear power plants had so much security. Inside the plant was fairly normal looking for the most part. I got the see the turbine rooms which was really impressive. It was amazing to sit there and think about how much power is flowing through such a small area. I also got to look into the control room through a small window in the door. The dry cask waste storage was a lot smaller then I thought it would be. I was impressed by the number of things they changed in response to Fukushima.<br />
<br />
Over all I would have to say I was very happy with the tour, and impressed by the whole operation. Also, it's nice to now be able say I've seen a nuclear power plant with my own eyes. <br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-89442554646457824822015-02-06T17:43:00.001-08:002015-02-06T18:30:59.728-08:00Comment Donation BankA comment donation bank would be a website where people donate their comments with the understanding that other people will copy and past them various places on the Internet.<br />
<br />
This is an idea I've been thinking about for a while. There is a lot of work involved in responding to the repeated bad ideas put forth by people who choose to remain ignorant. This website would exist to help reduce that work of fighting those bad ideas and misinformation by allowing people to keep repeating the same responses every time. <br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">How I picture it working</span></b><br />
<br />
Anyone will be able to make comment pages. Comment pages will have tags attached to them which help organize them. Tags will be for what the comment can be used to respond to. Some possible tags might be for things like nuclear waste, and nuclear proliferation threats, or responses to individual papers and websites. People can make their own tags or use tags that other people made. Comment pages will have their own comment section, a way to flag inappropriate or inaccurate comments, and a way to rate the usefulness of the comments to give feedback about how effective individual comments are in practice. <br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-84560433475375883432015-02-06T15:11:00.000-08:002015-02-06T15:11:12.490-08:00Some Costs Matter More than OthersIn any in depth discussion about energy invariably costs get brought up at some point. Cost are very important, but I would argue that some costs matter than others though. <br />
<br />
Costs of raw material and production costs are the most important because these cost can give you some idea of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested">EROEI</a>. The cost of raw materials give you some idea of the energy needed in order to gather and refine them. The cost of production gives you an idea of how much energy is needed in order to assemble the raw materials. <br />
<br />
Labour costs are much less important because people have to work doing something anyway. Also, the amount of labour needed matters more than the the dollar amount because it can give you some idea of how much labour will be available for other pursuits if the energy source in question became more prevalent. <br />
<br />
Costs imposed by governments are also much less important, because they often correlate mostly to labour costs, and because they can be changed at some future date. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-24554923413727650612015-02-05T08:00:00.001-08:002015-02-06T16:31:15.707-08:00My Week Long Trip to ChinaMy sister decided to go to China and she was kind enough to take me with her. I decided to take a break from the usual topics to talk about my trip. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>First Stop Beijing</b></span><br />
<br />
Beautify city. While there I say the great wall, the forbidden city and a number of temples. The city has a great subway system. It was the first time I've ever used a subway. I was impressed. Every major city should have one. Also impressive to me was the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Tram_and_Trolleybus">electric tram system</a>, and the rent a bike stations all over the place. There was also a lot of small vehicles which I'm guessing were fuel efficient.<br />
<br />
Traffic was insane. Traffic lanes and lights were more like suggestions then rules. Seat belts and turn signals were not widely used. Instead people seemed to rely mostly on their horns for telling other cars what they were doing.<br />
<br />
The air quality was a bit bad. There were some evergreen trees I saw which were decidedly lacking in the green part.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Second Stop Xi'an</b></span><br />
<br />
After a few days in Beijing I took a sleeper train to Xi'an. As the name implies a sleeper train is a train with beds. There were four beds to a room. Lucky my sister got the same room as me. Her bed was above mine. It was a bit hard to figure out what to do at the train stop since no one seemed to speak English there. Lucky by following the crowed we figured it out eventually. It is a good thing we didn't have to buy the tickets ourselves or we would really have been lost. <br />
<br />
When we got there we saw the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army">Terracotta army</a>. They were rather impressive. We also saw a temple and the cities wall. Unfortunately there was no subways in this city so we were a bit limited in what we could do. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Third Stop Shanghai </b></span><br />
<br />
We took a sleeper train to Shanghai. It was an impressive city. Unfortunately my sister was a bit sick so we didn't do much there. We saw the museum and the people's square then went back to our hotel. I went out and got some food by myself latter. It was only 15 yuan (Around $<span style="word-break: break-all;">2.40 US)</span> which was pretty amazing for the amount of food I got. The less touristy places in China are a lot cheaper. The next day we left. I went home, and my sister went to New Zealand. She'll be back in about a month. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-81473012281718956662015-01-14T16:17:00.000-08:002016-06-04T14:39:50.179-07:00Why I'm not Worried about Nuclear PowerGrowing up in California left me with a negative impression of nuclear power without any real knowledge of it. I remember being scared of it as a child. Especially the nuclear waste. I used to think they should shoot it all into space. Now such an idea seems ridiculous to me. I can't imagine why you would need to go so far when the problem is easily manageable here on earth. Nuclear power has moved way far down on the list of things to be afraid of. With this article I'd like to explain why. <br />
<br />
I'd just like to start by saying that radiation can be harmful. Everyone seems to agree with that. What people can't always agree about is the finer details such as if harm was done, how much harm was done and how much harm could be done by any particular event or potential event.<br />
<br />
Also, if you don't have a basic understand of radiation and radioisotopes you may wish to <a href="http://ratdog-justbecause.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-basic-information-usful-for.html">read this</a> first. <br />
<br />
So, you may be wondering why I'm not particularly worried about nuclear power given that radiation can be harmful. Well for starters radiation is all around us, and it always has been.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Radiation is all Around Us, and Always has Been</span></b><br />
<br />
Radiation is constantly <a href="http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae254.cfm">bombarding us from space</a>. It's <a href="http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm">in the oceans</a>, the soil and the food we eat. It's even <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon">in the air</a> we breath. It's a bit harder to be afraid of it when you realize it's all around us, and always has been. The first ape that walked on two legs was being bombarded by radiation. The first animal that crawled up out of the sea was being bombarded by radiation. Even when the first cells came about and life as we know it began there was radiation everywhere. <br />
<br />
In fact even fission was happening on earth before humanity was a thing. In the Oklo uranium deposit (located in the country of Gabon in equatorial Africa) it was discovered that a nuclear chain reaction caused by natural processes took place millions of years ago. <a href="http://jdlc.curtin.edu.au/research/oklo/oklo.cfm">Here is</a> a time line.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The history of the Oklo fossil reactors spans almost the entire
history of the earth. ‘Oklotime’ can be divided into four stages:<br />
<ol>
<li>U mobilization phase: Commenced ~3500 million years ago.</li>
<li>U ore/reactor formation: Started ~2800 million years ago.</li>
<li>Reactor operation: Commenced 2000 million years ago (for about a million years).</li>
<li>Waste movement: The last 2000 million years.</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<br />
Yet despite this nuclear reaction happening on earth uncontrolled by man, and unreported on by an media outlets, life on earth survived. In fact there is not evidence that it was hampered in any way. If that isn't enough for you there is something called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_fission">spontaneous fission</a> where heavy atoms undergo fission well... spontaneously. Also, there a <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/view/528781/cosmic-rays-neutrons-and-the-mutation-rate-in-evolution/">certain number of neutrons</a> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_error#Cosmic_rays_creating_energetic_neutrons_and_protons">around 14 neutrons/cm<sup>2</sup>/hour</a>) constantly bombarding the earth as a result of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_spallation">cosmic ray spallation</a>. When these neutrons encounter uranium they can induce fission just like in a nuclear reactor, but despite these two thing releasing small amounts of fission products directly into the environment since the earth began life goes on undeterred. <br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Learning more About Science has Made me Less Afraid</span></b><br />
<br />
I find learning more about science is a fun and rewarding activity. Which is why it shocks me when I encounter articles <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/what-americans-dont-know-about-science/283864/">like this one</a> and realize that some people know almost nothing about science at all. <br />
<br />
<b>All radioactivity is man-made (True/False)</b><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7c-ob4LVd8sHVkyXYN7STaMN7n-ZQveQuEjuaONeUX9g5xkHu2CK9BTyotEZbIAU_p3mRC-IAsW-zKkDyzBmY23s6XCyi8gefE9AgoirwcPerQJMQdkq7NbLFWV9cOYS803szWTC7T-I/s1600/All+radioactivity+is+man+made.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7c-ob4LVd8sHVkyXYN7STaMN7n-ZQveQuEjuaONeUX9g5xkHu2CK9BTyotEZbIAU_p3mRC-IAsW-zKkDyzBmY23s6XCyi8gefE9AgoirwcPerQJMQdkq7NbLFWV9cOYS803szWTC7T-I/s1600/All+radioactivity+is+man+made.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Percent that got it right</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It amazes me how many people don't even know about natural sources of radiation. I'm not a scientist, I'm never going to be a scientist, but I've found certain basic information about science incredibly useful for understanding the world around me. Without it I'm not sure how I would judge the endless barrage of claims that I encounter every day. Let me share with you some of the things I've learned about science that have made me less afraid. <br />
<br />
<b>Half Lives</b><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/video/half-life?utm_campaign=embed" style="color: #111111; font-family: helvetica;" target="_blank">
<b>Half-life</b>: Introduction to half-life
</a><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="355" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="https://www.khanacademy.org/embed_video?v=9REPnibO4IQ" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
Half lives describes how long until half of any given type of radioisotope has decayed into something else. This is important because it's during the decaying part where the radiation gets produced. In terms of safety there are good and bad things about any half life length. For example things with short half lives are more dangerous because they produce more radiation, but because they have short half lives they don't stick around as long which is good. Things with long half lives stick around for a long time, but they are less dangerous because they don't produce as much radiation. Learning about half lives made me realize that the really dangerous stuff will be gone before too long. As for the longed lived stuff, the world is fulled of long lived radioisotopes (uranium, thorium, C-14 etc.). It doesn't seem to hamper us much, if any.<br />
<br />
<b>Diffusion and Dilution </b><br />
<br />
Diffusion is a natural process where random collisions between particles in fluids or gasses cause them to travel around randomly becoming more intermingled within the medium. You can observe this process by placing a drop of red food coloring in a cup of water. Over time you can watch the red coloring spread out until the water is of uniform color. Here is a video that explains diffusion if you want to know more.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/aubZU0iWtgI" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Radioisotopes mixed into air and water diffuse outward in all direction becoming diluted in the process. Picture the place where the radioisotopes starts out at as one side of the radius of a sphere and the distance they have diffused out to as the other side. In order to better illustrate this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere#Enclosed_volume">Here is</a> the volume of a sphere.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSTwfPgmLDHxSI_HOugrTvx2_G3DcEyk79vukr1Q-o0GIH38iFHhvuFmtM46_3ja8iT90X_T67_Lwd9ykrnB5CX4oBo2K3y3AEJ6L-7Jl5bTeCOKz2moNog4mLBIOk4dQSOJNMsfKPCNo/s1600/Sphere.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSTwfPgmLDHxSI_HOugrTvx2_G3DcEyk79vukr1Q-o0GIH38iFHhvuFmtM46_3ja8iT90X_T67_Lwd9ykrnB5CX4oBo2K3y3AEJ6L-7Jl5bTeCOKz2moNog4mLBIOk4dQSOJNMsfKPCNo/s1600/Sphere.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
As you can see radius is taken to the third power. As you can imagine this means that volume increases very quickly as radius gets bigger. This is something called exponential growth. Exponential growth means the rate at which things grow also grows. Here is a graph showing the growth of the volume of a sphere.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTeqQDY_YGFwoWMnkikX5zWPEpGuAjTwYTJlkDkEKBQSRdL_kiY7sa9G9v1p7Z768UtfU6IxAOOkdK2oqmNTP1_zEPtv6OG3bydwq80ieRzHpQUzyGyGhVs6UQJlp-h28UgpKNx-bB0IA/s1600/image.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="197" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTeqQDY_YGFwoWMnkikX5zWPEpGuAjTwYTJlkDkEKBQSRdL_kiY7sa9G9v1p7Z768UtfU6IxAOOkdK2oqmNTP1_zEPtv6OG3bydwq80ieRzHpQUzyGyGhVs6UQJlp-h28UgpKNx-bB0IA/s1600/image.png" width="320" /></a></div>
As you can see with exponential growth thing get large very quickly. Even if things like the earth block some paths of diffusion it is still easy to see that the volume in which radioisotopes are diluted becomes large really fast, and dilution matters. Things that are very dangerous in concentrated forums are basically harmless if diluted enough. <br />
<br />
You may be wondering about solid particles right now, but if you are worried small particles like <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000GeoJI.142..426E">dust undergo diffusion</a> as well although it's different than the diffusion for liquids and gasses. One difference is that dust consolidates on the ground which is two dimensional, but the area of a circle circle also grows exponentially.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<strike><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJlnbX-_q0QIOQMgzllL2dVQVzkkvK5s77xJ-IoQ9Ierk__61EnklyfrXJpD2X7madOL-ieoQvJz_JMAGmlB_m9WrNY71A2XqW82YjcQOl0wHIxhktio8nZaOIO0NpoKD5Kpo76sFRPgA/s1600/Area+of+a+circle.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJlnbX-_q0QIOQMgzllL2dVQVzkkvK5s77xJ-IoQ9Ierk__61EnklyfrXJpD2X7madOL-ieoQvJz_JMAGmlB_m9WrNY71A2XqW82YjcQOl0wHIxhktio8nZaOIO0NpoKD5Kpo76sFRPgA/s1600/Area+of+a+circle.png" /></a></strike></div>
<br />
Although things like wind also needs to be considered there are definitely
limits to the concentration of small dust particles faraway from an
accident. As for larger particles I'm not sure what their means of locomotion would be. <br />
<br />
<b>Conclusion </b><br />
<br />
This kind of thinking might not be much consolation to people close to a serious nuclear power incident where concentrations of radioisotopes are greater, but it definitely shows that there limits to the scope of nuclear accidents, and history has shown even residents close to serious nuclear power accidents don't die from radiation poisoning. Radioisotopes with short half lives are dangerous in concentration, but diluted over a large volume they aren't that dangerous at all, and because they have a short half life what danger they do pose will soon pass. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>The World is full <span style="font-size: large;">of Dangerous Stuff</span></b></span><br />
<br />
Another reason why I'm not particularly worried is that that life is filled with harmful and potentially harmful things. Heck, In 2014 <a href="http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/07/travel/aviation-data/">761 people died</a> on commercial airlines world wide while a staggering <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm">33,783 people died</a> in automotive accidents in the US alone. For me nuclear power is pretty far down on the list of things to worry about.<br />
<br />
One example of something potentially very hazardous is water. If inhaled the content of a single swimming pool could kill hundred if not thousands of people. Such a situation may seem ridiculous to you, but it's no more ridiculous than <a href="http://gizmodo.com/the-abandoned-communist-reactor-that-could-have-killed-1644415889">arguments</a> that single nuclear reactor can kill us all (which ignores basic laws of physics like diffusion). <br />
<br />
At any rate <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html">here is</a> some information about drowning:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Every day, about ten people die from unintentional drowning. Of these,
two are children aged 14 or younger. Drowning ranks fifth among the
leading causes of unintentional injury death in the United States</blockquote>
That's quite a few people. Certainly more then die each day <a href="http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/191326/deaths-nuclear-energy-compared-other-causes">from nuclear energy</a>. I'm sure we could cut down this number by banned all the swimming pools and putting guards around all the rivers and lakes, but people aren't willing to do that because not only would it cost to much but swimming is fun. I wonder why we are so rational when it comes to swimming but irrational when it comes to nuclear power. After all affordable reliable energy is more than just fun, it a necessity of modern life.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">To Much Fear and Hyperbole not Enough Facts</span></b><br />
<br />
Of the two sides the anti nuclear side is by far the largest purveyor of bull crap. I've learned to take everything they say with a grain of salt.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7pRxFwO4zO_cB-lczi4vOZ_nIVm1qlWypGPC08sjc1Qd-1iju9BQ-jRRc4qsy7IVYwBMwQz9IwmelxwYAg_EQfph6jrL3IVFcaLCVWXXnl_JMBq9Iyr0Dww-Ldh0DCmlsEvUYG2iTmOc/s1600/Bull+Crap+Scale.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="249" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7pRxFwO4zO_cB-lczi4vOZ_nIVm1qlWypGPC08sjc1Qd-1iju9BQ-jRRc4qsy7IVYwBMwQz9IwmelxwYAg_EQfph6jrL3IVFcaLCVWXXnl_JMBq9Iyr0Dww-Ldh0DCmlsEvUYG2iTmOc/s1600/Bull+Crap+Scale.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hey, I call it like I see it</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
I tend to believe that everyone has a little bit of bull crap in them, but the anti nuclear activists often take it to the extreme. They are given to outrage with little in the way of facts, rampant paranoia and dismissing anything that disagrees with their preconceived notions. One example of anti nuclear bull crap can be seen below. <br />
.
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjX2ch0L5ys7wiBpIyoHFk4QwlB1ObhoqY5AU-eU2SWML5qnpUQGawOu5FD7Qf0M7Q7QBh1nHbmJ9w8nmU5EYgJMwrRO_qiXtj4ZrkGRm3TevoBjKUegWewcSJYYxNWEWSGy6ZiTa2f1Ig/s1600/A-Radioactive-Nightmare.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjX2ch0L5ys7wiBpIyoHFk4QwlB1ObhoqY5AU-eU2SWML5qnpUQGawOu5FD7Qf0M7Q7QBh1nHbmJ9w8nmU5EYgJMwrRO_qiXtj4ZrkGRm3TevoBjKUegWewcSJYYxNWEWSGy6ZiTa2f1Ig/s1600/A-Radioactive-Nightmare.jpg" width="262" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.enviroreporter.com/investigations/fukushima/a-radioactive-nightmare/">Source</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Maps like these are complete bull. You could take a piss in the ocean and draw an equally scary map showing how your piss is slowly contaminating all the seas of the world, and it would about as meaningful as this map. Let me <a href="http://savethepacificocean.org/tag/emissions/">give a quote</a> that shows what they are talking about.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
An estimated 538,100 terabecquerels (TBq) of iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137 was released. 520,000 TBq was released into the atmosphere between 12 to 31 March 2011 and 18,100 TBq into the ocean from 26 March to 30 September 2011. </blockquote>
Admittedly worse then urine, but not nearly as bad as they are making it out to be. A think a good comparison for putting it into context would be to compare what has gone into the ocean to <a href="http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm">what was already in the ocean</a>.
<br />
<ol>
<li>The oceans have Uranium in them. In the pacific ocean the radiation from Uranium is 22 EBq or 22,000,000 trillion becquerels. </li>
<li>The oceans have Potassium 40 in them. In the pacific ocean the radiation
from Potassium 40 is 7,400 EBq or 7,400,000,000 trillion becquerels.</li>
<li>The oceans have Carbon 14 in them. In the pacific ocean the radiation from Carbon 14 is 3 EBq or 3,000,000 trillion becquerels.</li>
<li>The oceans have Rubidium 87 in them. In the pacific ocean the radiation
from Rubidium 87 is 700 EBq or 700,000,000 trillion becquerels.</li>
<li>The oceans have Tritium in them. In the pacific ocean the radiation from Tritium is 370 PBq or 370,000 trillion becquerels.</li>
</ol>
<div style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-line; word-wrap: break-word;">
So we have…<br />
Uranium 22,000,000 trillion becquerels<br />
Potassium-40 7,400,000,000 trillion becquerels<br />
Carbon-14 3,000,000 trillion becquerels<br />
Rubidium-87 700,000,000 trillion becquerels<br />
<u>Tritium 370,000 trillion becquerels</u><br />
<b>Total 8,125,370,000 trillion becquerels</b></div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-line; word-wrap: break-word;">
So we have 8,125,370,000 trillion becquerels of radiation in the pacific ocean from natural sources and the anti nuclear activists don’t seem to care, but when the fifth most powerful earthquake ever recorded results in 18,100 TBq of radiation being released into the oceans and they start drawing scary maps and acting like we are all doomed. The logic in this position escapes me and it only gets worse...<br />
<br />
Uranium 238 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-238">99.284% of natural uranium</a>) has a half life of 4.468 billion years, and uranium 235 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-235">0.72% of natural uranium</a>) has a half life of 703,800,000 years, so it's going to be producing those becquerels for a long long time. If that still isn't enough for you rivers wash more uranium into the ocean at a rate of 32,000 tons (<a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/cft.pdf">page 165</a>) a year, and carbon-14 is only one of the <a href="https://www.physics.purdue.edu/ams/introduction/cosmogenic_nuclides.html">radioisotope continuously showering</a> us as a result of cosmic rays. Still not enough for you... There's more. Here is the decay chain for both naturally occurring forms of uranium. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi06I3ZvlZlrYBY6xxgSwg8nfWekYnJJcMPbH-xBD2R66dqZIOx0Ev_P9XLai3FlF8fp_pstGQMWiZ96rNsOn17vS5VodX4MKA9cz6oguzwOLfP3vzBii8fTFryWrfhQrwEUZiBCgn-MMs/s1600/Uranium-235+decay+chain.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi06I3ZvlZlrYBY6xxgSwg8nfWekYnJJcMPbH-xBD2R66dqZIOx0Ev_P9XLai3FlF8fp_pstGQMWiZ96rNsOn17vS5VodX4MKA9cz6oguzwOLfP3vzBii8fTFryWrfhQrwEUZiBCgn-MMs/s1600/Uranium-235+decay+chain.gif" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMovlGbXNAwhuIpxSokAdvSzVsiD4uILpl5MMsBaK6X8-eAh_scG6igi59DkVCt5pdl3gevRXzS_FEgtQayDrPIcas7cvc8MyNNm17YU_9yEhT9T6drXyG41x9v7XJf_frElwfmN51IqE/s1600/Uranium-238+decay+chain.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMovlGbXNAwhuIpxSokAdvSzVsiD4uILpl5MMsBaK6X8-eAh_scG6igi59DkVCt5pdl3gevRXzS_FEgtQayDrPIcas7cvc8MyNNm17YU_9yEhT9T6drXyG41x9v7XJf_frElwfmN51IqE/s1600/Uranium-238+decay+chain.gif" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/radser.html">source</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
That is an awful large number of radioisotopes continuously being produced in the oceans naturally, but anti nuclear activists don't seem to know or care at all. They seem only to care about radiation has to do with their agenda against safe clean nuclear power. This has made me lose a lot of trust in them.</div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-line; word-wrap: break-word;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Conclusion </b></span><br />
<br />
There are some people who think that Fukushima should mean the end of nuclear power, but their fears seem way overblown to me. As I learned more about the different types of energy I've come to favour nuclear power strongly. None of the other energy sources can do what it can. Wind and solar are intermittent, have lower power density and scaling. Fossil fuels are increasing hard to get at, and of course there is climate change to worry about. Nuclear power gives me hope for the future which is why I think it's worth defending</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-3996993538955299782015-01-13T09:33:00.001-08:002015-01-14T16:47:55.257-08:00Is this What They Mean by Clean Energy? Germany is destroying whole towns in order to power their country.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oLq1HCLUDEo" width="480"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Wind and solar require other power sources when the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCIWb2y1HQK3C8Arz2ajUZVhx8F9gK-MIa0XWy4NumTE3xrmIByCxMAbziB3KQQWDFBsGYQzE0EfxmRLB61q4Ctc9uKoOMesVAw_mbWyrucpK6iYeX6suyUd-GhWLaiJcoqJrPvUL3rRE/s1600/output.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCIWb2y1HQK3C8Arz2ajUZVhx8F9gK-MIa0XWy4NumTE3xrmIByCxMAbziB3KQQWDFBsGYQzE0EfxmRLB61q4Ctc9uKoOMesVAw_mbWyrucpK6iYeX6suyUd-GhWLaiJcoqJrPvUL3rRE/s320/output.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
If those other sources are coal then they bear part of the responsibility.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-73769312663289036452015-01-05T18:14:00.000-08:002015-01-11T15:45:12.821-08:00Both Low EROEI and Low Power Density is a Serious Problem - Wind Addition In my last post I talked about how having both low EROEI and low power density is a serious problem. I used solar as an example. In the comment section someone mentioned something about 80% of our power coming from wind, but wind isn't much better. It has a higher EROEI, but it's power density is terrible. I'll explain below. <br />
<br />
If you haven't read the <a href="http://ratdog-justbecause.blogspot.com/2015/01/low-eroei-and-low-power-density-is.html">last article</a> you might want to do so now.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>First I'll start with the sources. </b></span><br />
<br />
<b>Source One</b> - <a href="http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-energy-storage/">Catch 22 of energy storage</a>.<br />
<br />
EROEI for wind with storage is 3.9. <br />
<br />
<b>Source Two</b> - <a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/cft.pdf">Sustainable Energy — without the hot air</a><br />
<br />
The red stack (i.e. energy consumption) in figure 18.1 adds up to 195 kWh per day per person (page 103).<br />
<br />
4,000 m^2 land per person in UK. <br />
<br />
<b>Source Three</b> - <a href="http://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2013/02/rethinking-wind-power">Rethinking wind powe</a>r<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Keith’s research has shown that the generating capacity of very large
wind power installations (larger than 100 square kilometers) may peak at
between 0.5 and 1 watts per square meter.</blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Now lets think about it a little.</b></span><br />
<br />
Lets start by talking a bit about EROEI. The comment that inspired this post <a href="http://bountifulenergy.blogspot.co.at/2010/09/eroi-doesnt-matter.html?m=1">gave me a link</a> that says EROEI is meaningless. I disagree. EROEI is very important when it gets close to one. I'll explain but first let start with this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested">definition from Wikipedia</a> for anyone unfamiliar with the term.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In physics, energy economics and ecological energetics, energy returned on energy invested (EROEI or ERoEI); or energy return on investment (EROI), is the ratio of the amount of usable energy acquired from a particular energy resource to the amount of energy expended to obtain that energy resource.</blockquote>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPWVyDOoWTbma6njjv56OgW_nsBapmUJNK0Fwcas-3ynfqA5uh25lJPaQ9lBlrqiZvmiVQUoUUn7z-L7vBKRaERtxeOMhyphenhyphenKc66039AEamhVc0Yh3xnSdtdoM1jCXW8uBdImQtjk8o-CvQ/s1600/EROEI.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPWVyDOoWTbma6njjv56OgW_nsBapmUJNK0Fwcas-3ynfqA5uh25lJPaQ9lBlrqiZvmiVQUoUUn7z-L7vBKRaERtxeOMhyphenhyphenKc66039AEamhVc0Yh3xnSdtdoM1jCXW8uBdImQtjk8o-CvQ/s1600/EROEI.png" /></a></div>
<br />
EROEI is important because it creates a multiplier effect for other quantities. Other quantities include things like space, different material and man power. The closer EROEI gets to one the closer the need for those other quantities get's to infinity. <br />
<br />
<b>For example:</b><br />
<br />
Imagine that you had a some solar panels that had a EROEI of 2. One meter square of them produces let say 5 watts average. For simplicity's sake lets stick with only this one kind of power source for now.<br />
<br />
If you wanted to get 5 watts from these panels you would need both the one meter squared, plus another half a meter squared to maintain the one meter squared, plus another quarter meter square to maintain the half meter square and so forth. This goes on endlessly, and when you sum up the results you get the multiplier.<br />
<br />
<div class="MathJax_Display" role="textbox" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="MathJax" id="MathJax-Element-1-Frame"><nobr><span class="math" id="MathJax-Span-1" style="display: inline-block; margin-left: 2em; width: 24.95em;"><span style="display: inline-block; font-size: 136%; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 18.333em;"><span style="clip: rect(0.937em, 1000em, 3.997em, -0.386em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -2.647em;"><span class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-2"><span class="munderover" id="MathJax-Span-3"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 1.422em;"><span style="clip: rect(2.628em, 1000em, 4.323em, -0.386em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -3.725em;"><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-4" style="font-family: MathJax_Size2; vertical-align: 0em;">∑</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 3.725em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(1.735em, 1000em, 2.616em, -0.426em); left: 0.049em; position: absolute; top: -1.265em;"><span class="texatom" id="MathJax-Span-5"><span class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-6"><span class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-7" style="font-family: MathJax_Math; font-size: 70.7%; font-style: italic;">n</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-8" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; font-size: 70.7%;">=</span><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-9" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; font-size: 70.7%;">0</span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(1.793em, 1000em, 2.508em, -0.402em); left: 0.368em; position: absolute; top: -3.503em;"><span class="texatom" id="MathJax-Span-10"><span class="mrow" id="MathJax-Span-11"><span class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-12" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; font-size: 70.7%;">∞</span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span class="mfrac" id="MathJax-Span-13" style="padding-left: 0.167em;"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; margin-left: 0.12em; margin-right: 0.12em; position: relative; width: 1.126em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.358em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.245em; position: absolute; top: -3.324em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-14" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">1</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(3.167em, 1000em, 4.167em, -0.391em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.503em; position: absolute; top: -3.334em;"><span class="msubsup" id="MathJax-Span-15"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 1.006em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.391em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -2.647em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-16" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">2</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="left: 0.49em; position: absolute; top: -2.746em;"><span class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-17" style="font-family: MathJax_Math; font-size: 70.7%; font-style: italic;">n</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 4.02em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(0.87em, 1000em, 1.225em, -0.441em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -1.298em;"><span style="border-left: 1.126em solid; display: inline-block; height: 1.25px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: 0em; width: 0px;"></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 1.078em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-18" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.278em;">=</span><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-19" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.278em;">1</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-20" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.222em;">+</span><span class="mfrac" id="MathJax-Span-21" style="padding-left: 0.222em;"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; margin-left: 0.12em; margin-right: 0.12em; position: relative; width: 1.028em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.358em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.245em; position: absolute; top: -3.324em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-22" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">1</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(3.009em, 1000em, 4.167em, -0.391em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.454em; position: absolute; top: -3.193em;"><span class="msubsup" id="MathJax-Span-23"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 0.908em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.391em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -2.647em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-24" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">2</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="left: 0.49em; position: absolute; top: -2.746em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-25" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; font-size: 70.7%;">1</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 4.02em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(0.87em, 1000em, 1.225em, -0.441em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -1.298em;"><span style="border-left: 1.028em solid; display: inline-block; height: 1.25px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: 0em; width: 0px;"></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 1.078em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-26" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.222em;">+</span><span class="mfrac" id="MathJax-Span-27" style="padding-left: 0.222em;"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; margin-left: 0.12em; margin-right: 0.12em; position: relative; width: 1.028em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.358em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.245em; position: absolute; top: -3.324em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-28" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">1</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(3.009em, 1000em, 4.167em, -0.391em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.454em; position: absolute; top: -3.193em;"><span class="msubsup" id="MathJax-Span-29"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 0.908em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.391em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -2.647em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-30" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">2</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="left: 0.49em; position: absolute; top: -2.746em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-31" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; font-size: 70.7%;">2</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 4.02em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(0.87em, 1000em, 1.225em, -0.441em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -1.298em;"><span style="border-left: 1.028em solid; display: inline-block; height: 1.25px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: 0em; width: 0px;"></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 1.078em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-32" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">+</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-33" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-34" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-35" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-36" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">+</span><span class="mfrac" id="MathJax-Span-37" style="padding-left: 0.167em;"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; margin-left: 0.12em; margin-right: 0.12em; position: relative; width: 1.126em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.358em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.245em; position: absolute; top: -3.324em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-38" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">1</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(3.167em, 1000em, 4.167em, -0.391em); left: 50%; margin-left: -0.503em; position: absolute; top: -3.334em;"><span class="msubsup" id="MathJax-Span-39"><span style="display: inline-block; height: 0px; position: relative; width: 1.006em;"><span style="clip: rect(1.834em, 1000em, 2.794em, -0.391em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -2.647em;"><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-40" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">2</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="left: 0.49em; position: absolute; top: -2.746em;"><span class="mi" id="MathJax-Span-41" style="font-family: MathJax_Math; font-size: 70.7%; font-style: italic;">n</span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.353em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 4.02em; width: 0px;"></span></span><span style="clip: rect(0.87em, 1000em, 1.225em, -0.441em); left: 0em; position: absolute; top: -1.298em;"><span style="border-left: 1.126em solid; display: inline-block; height: 1.25px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: 0em; width: 0px;"></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 1.078em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span></span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-42" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">+</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-43" style="font-family: MathJax_Main;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-44" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-45" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">.</span><span class="mo" id="MathJax-Span-46" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.167em;">=</span><span class="mn" id="MathJax-Span-47" style="font-family: MathJax_Main; padding-left: 0.278em;">2</span></span><span style="display: inline-block; height: 2.647em; width: 0px;"></span></span></span><span style="border-left: 0em solid; display: inline-block; height: 3.895em; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: -1.703em; width: 0px;"></span></span></nobr></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Thanks to Mark44 on <a href="https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/help-with-an-equation-for-a-blog-post-please.790790/">physics forums</a> for this!</span><br />
<br />
<h2>
<span style="font-size: large;">Now lets talk about the multiplier </span></h2>
The multiplier works for all quantities not just area.<br />
<br />
<b>For example: </b><br />
<br />
if it take 5 people to maintain some generation that produces 5 watts and the multiplier is 3 then that 5 watts really needs 15 people (5 X 3 =15).<br />
<br />
Here is the formula you need to figgure out the multiplier for any given EROEIs.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg609kjBXgKACDZyBwLoQfbaurwH31uAhg-aqKJHFz889Mpy8DvadHiEHY8KS7DG6aTz5tQaSMKL6zD-6rPWU9uJRxIslQvDfkdxN-KKH-cQP1hPyxgAxAXxWk9dgWlxfAUZQXlKtUTLsg/s1600/Equation.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg609kjBXgKACDZyBwLoQfbaurwH31uAhg-aqKJHFz889Mpy8DvadHiEHY8KS7DG6aTz5tQaSMKL6zD-6rPWU9uJRxIslQvDfkdxN-KKH-cQP1hPyxgAxAXxWk9dgWlxfAUZQXlKtUTLsg/s1600/Equation.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Where X = EROEI</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This doesn't only apply to a one power source systems. Any power source that with EROEI close to one would require outrageous amounts of different resources in order to contribute significantly to our total energy supply. <br />
<br />
<h2>
<span style="font-size: large;">Now for Wind </span></h2>
The multiplier for wind isn't that bad, but the power density is crap. At
between 0.5 and 1 watts per square meter even if you covered the whole of the UK with wind turbines the yield would still kind of suck.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<span style="font-size: large;">Here's the math</span></h3>
<br />
4,000 m^2 is space in uk for each person. <br />
<br />
1.34 is the multiplier for wind<br />
<br />
So... <br />
<br />
4000 / 1.34 ≃ 3,000<br />
<br />
Around 3,000 is how much possible space for wind for each person when you minus the space for wind turbines needed to maintain the system. <br />
<br />
So between...<br />
<br />
(3,000 * .5 * 24)/1,000 ≃ 36 kWh per day per person <br />
<br />
(3,000 * 1 * 24)/1,000 ≃ 72 kWh per day per person<br />
<br />
<br />
So maybe you can get close to 80% if you cover the whole of the UK with wind farms (assuming the EROEI doesn't drop because of diminishing returns). Do you think people can really cover so much of the UK with renewable energy? What about space they need for other things like energy storage. It's really hard for me to believe, and even if you could I think it would be pretty horrible. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-44557624264442426252015-01-05T10:22:00.000-08:002015-01-10T13:02:28.671-08:00Both Low EROEI and Low Power Density is a Serious Problem - Solar PV Addition Taking information from two sources I'm going to show that a combination of low EROEI, and low power density is a huge problem. <a href="http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-energy-storage/">Here is</a> the first source which talks about EROEI with energy storage. It's called catch 22 of energy storage. <a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/cft.pdf">Here is </a>the second that talk about power density among other thing. It's called Sustainable Energy — without the hot air. Both of them are a good reads if you haven't read them already. <br />
<br />
<b>From the First Source</b><br />
<br />
The EROEI for solar pv with energy storage is listed at 1.6.<br />
<br />
<b>From the Second Source </b><br />
<br />
If we covered 5% of the UK with 10%-efficient panels, we’d have<br />
≃<br />
10% × 100 W/m2 × 200 m2 per person = 50 kWh/day/person. (page 41)<br />
<br />
The red stack (i.e. energy consumption) in figure 18.1 adds up to 195 kWh per day per person (page 103).<br />
<h2>
<b>Now lets think about this a little</b></h2>
EROEI describes the energy that is needed to be invested (i.e. used) in
order to get more energy. If the EROEI is 2 then one unit (of some unit
of energy) invested will get you 2 (of that unit). If solar is to become
a permanent thing then maintaining any given area of it will take
energy. The amount of energy is determined by it's EROEI. Lets say
that the EROEI is 2. Then maintaining 1m<sup>2</sup> of it would take 1/2m<sup>2</sup>. That 1/2m<sup>2</sup> would need 1/4m<sup>2</sup>
and so on. The sum of all these works out to some finite number. In order to work it out you need something called the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_series">Geometric series</a>.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7r06WzeKhfgy7OYbZPFN9J83QQOOAaRXZYPfVIoJ3ZRa2D5hXh5qEFw24Q1CqYJZ6O7_RfgdFqJInEv-TChwfvxtQ6TvdQy0iKkPIXOi566R7ppGFGQYtA9-h99a5Au2PbxUCP05BA_M/s1600/Equation.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7r06WzeKhfgy7OYbZPFN9J83QQOOAaRXZYPfVIoJ3ZRa2D5hXh5qEFw24Q1CqYJZ6O7_RfgdFqJInEv-TChwfvxtQ6TvdQy0iKkPIXOi566R7ppGFGQYtA9-h99a5Au2PbxUCP05BA_M/s1600/Equation.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Here's the equation where X = EROEI</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Using the formula I get 2.67(1/(1-(1/x))) using solar PV's EROEI. The number 2.67 is a multiplier we can use to figure out the total area needed. That means instead of 5% of the uk's land providing 50 kWh/day/person it would take 13.3 % (5 X 2.67 = 13.3) when taking EROEI into account. In order to get 195 kWh/day/person it would take 51.87 % (13.3 X (195/50)) or 207,480 m<sup>2</sup> per person.<br />
<br />
That doesn't even count the area of land used by the energy storage. Pump hydro for the source given. <a href="http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/">Here's a</a> good source that talks about that. Guess what it take a lot of space, and don't forget that there are other land uses as well. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicvAfEaoLwSsNDlrakPkfzrNXAV5rJ7c9NwPlEjv6lrEJkaMJH1Y1QevdMbGK1vBgtzuF_rQkj07GuO7GsFfBZGNz32Fe8RaZQpRYi_Qs5RXNdI2nJ2bLZYMsTWbNKrhGA_MYPlikjj-0/s1600/Untitled.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicvAfEaoLwSsNDlrakPkfzrNXAV5rJ7c9NwPlEjv6lrEJkaMJH1Y1QevdMbGK1vBgtzuF_rQkj07GuO7GsFfBZGNz32Fe8RaZQpRYi_Qs5RXNdI2nJ2bLZYMsTWbNKrhGA_MYPlikjj-0/s1600/Untitled.jpg" height="320" width="137" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Source Two Page 41</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
And don't think you can do without most of the storage because of demand response, management, whatever you want to call it. Solar power manufacturing facilities cost a lot. In order to keep the prices down they need to be run 24/7, so at most you can only ration 37.5 % (1 / 2.67 = 37.5) percent of that power. <br />
<br />
This is simply madness, or more like a fantasy. It's time people came to terms that they have two choices. Fossil fuel, or nuclear power. Fossil fuel's give us a few short years in exchange for our climate and our children's future while nuclear power gives us hope and a better life for countless millions. I know which one I'm rooting for. <br />
<br />
<br />
Update: I changed a lot. Credit to my brother Jeremy for helping me with the math. I also <a href="http://ratdog-justbecause.blogspot.com/2015/01/low-eroei-and-low-power-density-is_5.html">added another post</a> that talks about the same thing for wind.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-90344983956222766892015-01-04T16:30:00.001-08:002015-03-11T11:05:43.391-07:00Some Basic Information Useful for Understanding Nuclear Power Safety<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
When people talk about nuclear power safety they often don't explain certain basic information that you need to know in order to really understand the the subject. This is probably for the best because repeating the same information over and over again would grow old really fast, but unfortunately this leaves people new to the subject unable to fully understand the arguments. The goal of this article is to hopefully be helpful to anyone who doesn't understand the basics. Basically I tried to write something that I think would have been helpful to me when I was starting out. <br />
<br />
<h2>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>The <span style="font-size: large;">Very </span>Basic </b></span></h2>
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Stylised_Lithium_Atom.png/200px-Stylised_Lithium_Atom.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="A drawing of a Lithium atom. In the middle is the nucleus, which in this case has four neutrons (blue) and three protons (red). Orbiting it are its three electrons." border="0" data-file-height="296" data-file-width="260" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Stylised_Lithium_Atom.png/200px-Stylised_Lithium_Atom.png" height="200" width="175" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Lithium atom model</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Lets start with the very basic, all the stuff on earth is made up of tiny building blocks called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom">atoms</a> (<a href="http://www.webelements.com/index.html">you can see all types on the periodic table of the elements</a>). Atoms are made up of three things. Those three things are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron">electrons</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton">protons</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron">neutrons</a>. Protons and neutron exist in the middle of the atom clumped together in
what is called the nucleus. The electrons exist around that. Atoms can form molecules (i.e. groups of atoms) by sharing electrons. <br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<br />
The
type of atom (i.e. the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_element">element</a>)
is determined by the number of protons in it's nucleus. For example
atoms that have one proton are hydrogen atoms, and atoms that have 92
protons are uranium atoms.<br />
<br />
Unlike protons and neutrons, the number of
electrons an atom has can change fairly easily. The default position for atoms is having the same number of electrons as protons. When atoms don't have an equal numbers of protons and electrons they
are called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion">ions</a>. Knowing what ion you're dealing is important because different ions (even of the same element) behave very differently chemically which is why they came up with Equivalent notations for writing it down.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/Ions_notation.svg/220px-Ions_notation.svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" border="0" class="thumbimage" data-file-height="99" data-file-width="309" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/Ions_notation.svg/220px-Ions_notation.svg.png" height="70" width="220" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Example of Equivalent Notations</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Every proton is +1, and every electron is -1, simple subtraction tells you what ion you've got. For example iron (Symbol Fe) has 26 protons. If an atom of Iron has 24 electrons then its ionic state is 2+ (26 - 24 = +2), and if it has 28 electrons its ionic state 2- (26 - 28 = -2).<br />
<br />
The number of neutrons an atom has determines what type of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope">isotope</a>
it is. All atoms are some type of isotope even though it's not usually
that important because different isotopes of the same element
(i.e. type of atom) behave the same chemically for most intents
purposes and thus it is often not mentioned or thought about. <br />
<br />
Isotopes
are identified by their atomic mass. The atomic mass includes both
protons and neutrons (electrons are very light so they don't count). So for example there are three naturally
occurring isotopes of carbon on earth. They are called carbon-12, carbon-13 and
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-14">Carbon-14</a>. Carbon has 6 protons so Carbon-12 has 6 neutrons (12 - 6 = 6), Carbon-13 has 7 neutrons (13 - 6 = 7) and Carbon-14 has has 8 neutrons (14 - 6 = 8).<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Ionizing Radiation and Radioisotopes</b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
Not all isotopes are stable. Unstable isotopes eventually decay into different types of atoms releasing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation">radiation</a> in the process. For example Carbon-12 and Carbon-13 are stable while Cabron-14 eventually decays into
Nitrogen-14 (which is stable).<br />
<br />
The unstable isotopes are called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radionuclide">radioisotopes</a> (also known as radionuclide, radioactive nuclide, or radioactive isotopes), and the radiation released is know as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation">ionizing radiation</a> although most people just call it radiation.<br />
<br />
When an unstable isotope decays is random while the probability of it
decaying over any period time is fixed. This probability is understood through something called a half-life. A half-life is the time it takes for half of a given amount of a radioisotope to transmute (i.e. decay) into something else<br />
<br />
It's a bit like rolling a dice. Every time you roll a dice the chance of getting a one is the same. If you replace "time you roll a dice" with "fixed period of time" and "getting a one" with "a type radioisotope decaying" it's exactly the same. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtZUSOw_n1RrnclKiEw1er5EQgWkZ9r5aXUFKA8LGSot5OTG9IIIZk9Hd_5WqLXBzoJHQgIbfEFP-PLUy0AnV1GzwC8KvrWhyCGF7kDxhyphenhyphen9kIrDKaFvAJqY4pGZUapBnb_49nOoadtF48/s1600/Dice.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtZUSOw_n1RrnclKiEw1er5EQgWkZ9r5aXUFKA8LGSot5OTG9IIIZk9Hd_5WqLXBzoJHQgIbfEFP-PLUy0AnV1GzwC8KvrWhyCGF7kDxhyphenhyphen9kIrDKaFvAJqY4pGZUapBnb_49nOoadtF48/s1600/Dice.jpeg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
You can also use the dice analogy to understand half-lives. Picture that you were rolling a group of six sided dice. Every time you rolled them you remove any dice that lands on a one. The half life of these dice would be three rolls because after three rolls half the dice should be gone. You might be thinking to yourself that half lives aren't very precise because of the random element, but you have to remember that atoms come in large numbers. There are something like 78,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms in a <a href="http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=6447.0">grain of sand</a>. If you rolled six dice then at the end maybe half
would be gone or maybe not, but if you are rolling trillions of dice pretty
darn close to half of them would be gone. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaikbTDNJI296nYmBbv7XpuSj3M0r8MLJwdab0mPzLY8uUUkyNHbvkZMLVQHDbb5tCpF4hO5_RL3YpeOgonuQcQ9Y9AKq2lTbO95bi_70xKVGYkvk4Yyf07kKqH15lN9jkkhdBdFtBY9I/s1600/Sand.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaikbTDNJI296nYmBbv7XpuSj3M0r8MLJwdab0mPzLY8uUUkyNHbvkZMLVQHDbb5tCpF4hO5_RL3YpeOgonuQcQ9Y9AKq2lTbO95bi_70xKVGYkvk4Yyf07kKqH15lN9jkkhdBdFtBY9I/s1600/Sand.jpeg" /></a></div>
<br />
In fact half lives are so precise that people use it for dating stuff. There is something called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating">Radiocarbon dating</a> that uses the half life of Carbon-14 in order to tell how old things are. Carbon-14 is constantly being created in the earth's atmosphere by nitrogen being bombarded by <a href="http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae254.cfm">cosmic radiation</a>. Because it's being created at a constant rate it's also being absorbed by plants at a constant rate and from plants it moves to animals. When something dies it stop taking in Carbon-14 so by using it's half life researches can tell how long ago something died based off the amount of carbon-14 left in it's remains. <br />
<br />
Some radioisotopes decay into other radioisotopes. When that happens you have what is called a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decay_chain">decay chain</a>. The decay chain is used to describe how radioisotopes decay until they eventually reach a stable state. <a href="http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/radser.html">Here is</a> the decay chain for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium">Thorium</a> a common naturally occurring radioisotope. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitN78D6qS16Uojyu3ySBMJOqU9mG8KYDlfC3Ze0AcgFMK3_OUxZoBDbFt68yrGLLTz28WZbzmBtclYhopzpVCd9ZYN1sEj_Nl9zLEApTxG1MKJ63aj_SnzYnpo3i00vbK4bxiggVlkE_g/s1600/Thorium+Decay+chain.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitN78D6qS16Uojyu3ySBMJOqU9mG8KYDlfC3Ze0AcgFMK3_OUxZoBDbFt68yrGLLTz28WZbzmBtclYhopzpVCd9ZYN1sEj_Nl9zLEApTxG1MKJ63aj_SnzYnpo3i00vbK4bxiggVlkE_g/s1600/Thorium+Decay+chain.gif" height="310" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
You may be wondering at this point where all the radioisotopes on earth come from. Well some <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclides#Primordial_radioactive_nuclides">(34 types)</a> are primordial (i.e. they came about before the earth was formed). This includes Uranium, Thorium and Potassium-40. <a href="https://www.physics.purdue.edu/ams/introduction/cosmogenic_nuclides.html">Some of them</a> are caused by cosmic radiation such as Carbon-14. A small minority are created as a result of human activity, the most common of these activities involves the breaking down of larger radioisotopes into smaller radioisotopes in order to produce energy. <a href="http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm">Here is</a> a really good link about radioactivity in the environment if you're interested in learning more about it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Types of Radiation</b></span> <br />
<br />
<br />
The types of radiation produced by radioisotopes include both <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation">Electromagnetic radiation</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_radiation">Particle radiation</a>. Electromagnetic radiation plays a big part in our lives. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum">Depending on the frequency</a> it has many different applications and also names. The most familiar form is the visitable spectrum, or more commonly just called light. It's also useful for microwaves ovens, cell phones, radio, x-rays etc. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXYrPr4jRwf508KsF5FN0d4KwOCB6Ppfi5tsF2Cb4YOTSSlvO7tUE3UU19QYqgH4MtWWxlybsVfUbgSfj8FAkVG-iKwBDNLauLs3VqTwhNUGMrU0E0xuCO-uQDp-TWQhYfG7entzlWs1U/s1600/490px-EM_spectrum.svg.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXYrPr4jRwf508KsF5FN0d4KwOCB6Ppfi5tsF2Cb4YOTSSlvO7tUE3UU19QYqgH4MtWWxlybsVfUbgSfj8FAkVG-iKwBDNLauLs3VqTwhNUGMrU0E0xuCO-uQDp-TWQhYfG7entzlWs1U/s1600/490px-EM_spectrum.svg.png" height="212" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
But for our purposes we are only interested in electromagnetic radiation that is ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is radiation that has enough energy to knock electrons off atoms (or molecules) thus ionizing them. This is important because as we talked about before different ions behave much differently chemically. This can cause problems. In most cases a few atoms (or molecules) being ionized doesn't matter much, but in some cases it does. For example ionizing radiation can cause harm to living tissue. You've probably noticed such harm yourself if you've ever spent too much time in the sun and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunburn">got sunburned</a>. <br />
<br />
Some atoms (and molecules) hold their electrons better than others so what types of radiation are ionizing isn't so clear cut, but really what we care most about is the effect of ionizing on human beings so I would say ultraviolet (sun burn) rang and higher (higher frequency that is, the higher the frequency the more energetic the more able to knock of electrons) is ionizing radiation. <br />
<br />
Usually when we are talking about radioisotopes decaying we are talking about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray">gamma rays</a> (i.e. y-rays), not X-rays or ultraviolet. Lower wave length ionizing radiation can be created as secondary radiation (i.e. ionizing radiation created by other ionizing radiation) though. <br />
<br />
Particle radiation is simply particles that are moving very quickly.
The two types of particles that matter for what we are talking about
are <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle">Alpha</a> particles and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_particle">Beta</a> particles.<br />
<br />
Alpha particles are helium-4 atoms without any electron. The ones created by radioactive decay have a strong ability to ionize things, but they have little ability to penetrate shielding and can be stopped by a piece of paper or the thin layer of dead skin all of us have. <br />
<br />
Beta particles are electrons or sometimes positrons. Positrons are the antimatter equivalent of electrons. When electrons and positrons meat they destroy each other releasing some gamma rays in the process.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Metric Prefixes </b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
Now that we've covered what radiation is and where it comes from lets talk about how it's measured. Well before that we have to talk about something call <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix">metric prefixes</a>. If you spend time reading about this subject you're going to encounter these things a lot. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY_4E8K4Owo4fQ2h0TR_o9jf9UMfXFEVe0rNnsUDQOZ4DbbPdosuc9NSjboIx4XfqbQ92klTNSMIFzyWbcYTFHdOMThzy-IV3ABHOUqk2wMo8_VNBbn0IfAs9D5gyR_ZeEtCtX-SPdzuk/s1600/metric+prefixes.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY_4E8K4Owo4fQ2h0TR_o9jf9UMfXFEVe0rNnsUDQOZ4DbbPdosuc9NSjboIx4XfqbQ92klTNSMIFzyWbcYTFHdOMThzy-IV3ABHOUqk2wMo8_VNBbn0IfAs9D5gyR_ZeEtCtX-SPdzuk/s1600/metric+prefixes.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">For Micro it's usually abbreviated μ or mc</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Metric prefixes are used for writing really large or really small numbers without having to write all the zeros. It's very similar to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_notation">scientific notations</a> in that regards. The prefix goes before the unit abbreviation. For example with 10 cm the c is the metric prefix (centi) and the m is the abbreviated unit types (meter). <br />
<br />
It's fairly easy to convert a number to a different prefix or know the number in it's entirety (i.e. what the number is without prefixes). Look at the table above to the left of prefix you want to convert from. The number to the right of the 10 is the one we're interested in. Take that number and subtract the number next to the 10 of the prefix you want to convert to. If you want to convert to no prefixes then subtract zero. If the number you get is negative move the decimal point that many spaces to left, if it's positive move the decimal point that many places to the right. <br />
<br />
For example 1,000 nm (-9 - (-6) = -3) = 1 µm , 1,000 µm (-6 - (-3) = -3) = 1 mm, 1,000 mm (-3 - 0 = -3) = 1 m, and 1,000 m (0 - 3 = -3 ) = 1 km. Where m stands for meters.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Measuring Radiation </b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
There are a lot of different ways of measuring radiation. I'll try and go over the most common ones.<br />
<br />
<b>Activity (A)</b><br />
<br />
Activity measures the number of nucleus decays. It's calculated using amounts of radioisotopes and knowledge of there half lives. The two main units for this are Becquerel, and Curie. <br />
<br />
The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becquerel">becquerel</a> (symbol Bq) it is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_derived_unit">SI derived unit</a> of radioactivity. One Bq is defined as the activity of a quantity of radioactive material (i.e. radioisotopes) in which one nucleus decays per second. Basically it's a unit used to describe the amount of radiation produced by some amount of radioisotopes.<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curie">curie</a> (symbol Ci) is a non-SI unit of radioactivity, named after Marie and Pierre Curie. It is defined as 1 Ci = 3.7 × 10<sup>10</sup> decays per second.<br />
<br />
Conversion factors:<br />
<dl><dd>1 GBq = 0.027 Ci </dd></dl>
<b>Absorbed dose (D)</b><br />
<br />
Absorbed dose measures the energy (from ionizing radiation) absorbed by a mass. This is important because it takes energy to ionize things so knowing how much energy is going towards ionizing things help you know how much stuff is getting ionized. This in turn can help give you some idea of the effect. Most <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger_counter">Geiger counters </a>measure this. The two main unit types for this are Rad and Grey.<br />
<br />
The SI unit for absorbed dose is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_%28unit%29">gray</a> (Gy). One gray is the absorption of one joule of energy, in the form of ionizing radiation, per kilogram of matter.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
The other unit is called the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rad_%28unit%29">Rad</a>. The rad is a non-SI CGS unit that is sometimes also used, predominantly in the USA.<br />
<br />
Conversion factor:<br />
<dl><dd>1 rad = 0.01 Gy </dd></dl>
<b>Dose equivalent (H)</b><br />
<br />
Dose equivalent is a measure of the health effect of low levels of ionizing radiation on the human body. The two main unit types for this are Roentgen and Sievert. Quantities that are measured in roentgens or sieverts are intended to represent the stochastic health risk, which for radiation dose assessment is defined as the probability of cancer induction and genetic damage. There is no way to directly measure equivalent dose. Instead other measurements are used to arrive at equivalent dose using various conventions. For example with X-rays and gamma rays the gray is numerically the same value when expressed as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert" title="Sievert">sievert</a> (Sv), but for <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particles" title="Alpha particles">alpha particles</a> one gray is equivalent to twenty <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert" title="Sievert">sieverts</a> because of the radiation weighting factor that is applied. <br />
<br />
Conversion factor:<br />
<dl><dd>1 rem = 0.01 Sv <br />
<br /></dd></dl>
<span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Radiation Inside the Body</span></b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
Internal doses can be worse than external one's (depends on amounts and other factors). For example alpha particles can be stopped by a thin layer of dead skin making them fairly harmless outside the body, but more dangerous than other types of radiation inside it. In fact a large part of people's average annual doses comes from alpha particles produced by the decay of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon">Radon (symbol Rn)</a>. Radon is an odourless, colourless, gas that exists in small amounts all around us. Radon is constantly being created as part of the decay chain of all the naturally occurring isotopes of uranium and thorium.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5-VNHHJpV-Y2QIvZUY9xZm8gCjXgMlsJn6mq_7kUQyMrJHXHMwHdkAOu4UUdGc6oeO00bI7TmwIhYKsvXh_tXelNVV4x7qXqvGV_o6FY4Bh_19TkWZcXh3N4jsM-AGveQxMuZMIoC18Y/s1600/Doeses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5-VNHHJpV-Y2QIvZUY9xZm8gCjXgMlsJn6mq_7kUQyMrJHXHMwHdkAOu4UUdGc6oeO00bI7TmwIhYKsvXh_tXelNVV4x7qXqvGV_o6FY4Bh_19TkWZcXh3N4jsM-AGveQxMuZMIoC18Y/s1600/Doeses.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
At any rate predicting internal doses is important. An important thing to remember when internal doses are concerned is that different isotopes behave the same chemically. This can be both a good thing and a bad thing. For example <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine-131">Iodine-131</a> is a radioactive isotope of iodine that is produced a lot in nuclear reactors. It has a half life of about 8 days. Like all iodine it's utilized by the thyroid which means if it gets released into the environment it can be a problem. Luckily by taking potassium-iodide pill you can flood your body with non radioactive iodine so Iodine-131 wont get absorbed, and because it's half life is so short it will be gone in short order. Because they behave the same chemically radioisotopes also have many beneficial uses such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiopharmacology">Radiopharmacology</a> a branch of medicine which uses radioisotopes for medical imaging and in therapy for many diseases (for example, brachytherapy). Ironically Iodine-131 is also one of the radioisotope used in medicine.<br />
<br />
<b>Internal Dosimetry </b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_dosimetry">Internal dosimetry</a> is the science and art of internal ionizing radiation dose assessment due to radioisotopes incorporated inside the human body. Radioisotopes deposited within a body will irradiate tissues and organs and give rise to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committed_dose" title="Committed dose">committed dose</a> until they are excreted from the body or the radionuclide is completely decayed. The internal doses for workers or members of the public exposed to the
intake of radioactive particulates can be estimated using <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioassay" title="Bioassay">bioassay</a> data such as lung and body counter measurements, urine or faecal radioisotope concentration, etc.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Man-Made Radiation Exposure Breakdown </b></span><br />
<br />
This kind of depends on what you think of as man made exposure. For example is Radon pumped into people's houses along with natural gas man made or natural exposure? At any rate, not counting stuff like Radon most man made radiation exposure is a result of various medical procedures (such as x-ray). This accounts for around 20% of exposure worldwide and up to 50% of exposure in industrialized countries. <a href="http://www.medicalradiation.com/facts-about-radiation/radiation-sources/man-made-radiation/">Here is</a> a pie chart.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgmIm52HHb54NidhebCdzv9yAyVwrJHon9UqUXZ51a0BH5Xjt1OdiqpkHueFWgSGz6QuSdQ5jN4o7sUccvhm5V-BQKfWs0LOa13T45Bn_30dqXi6iR_rpLpBPJp3QK288AKW3BIaKjxFc/s1600/kreisdiagramm_gross.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgmIm52HHb54NidhebCdzv9yAyVwrJHon9UqUXZ51a0BH5Xjt1OdiqpkHueFWgSGz6QuSdQ5jN4o7sUccvhm5V-BQKfWs0LOa13T45Bn_30dqXi6iR_rpLpBPJp3QK288AKW3BIaKjxFc/s1600/kreisdiagramm_gross.jpg" height="210" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Harm </b></span><br />
<br />
<b>Linear no threshold model</b><br />
<br />
The most widely accepted model for determining harm for low doses is known as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model">Linear no threshold model</a> (LNT). For this model it doesn't matter how much radiation you
receive. All radiation can cause harm, all radiation has an equal
chance of causing harm. <a href="http://www.wise-uranium.org/rdcri.html">Here is</a> a nifty online calculator for it applying it. <br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Organizations That Support LNT</b><br />
<br />
<a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Research_Council" title="United States National Research Council">United States National Research Council</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The assumption that any stimulatory hormetic effects from low doses of
ionizing radiation will have a significant health benefit to humans that
exceeds potential detrimental effects from the radiation exposure is
unwarranted at this time."</blockquote>
United States National Academies<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of
exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be
demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial." </blockquote>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Council_on_Radiation_Protection_and_Measurements" title="National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements">National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Scientific_Committee_on_the_Effects_of_Atomic_Radiation" title="United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation">United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation</a> (UNSCEAR)<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Until the [...] uncertainties on low-dose response are resolved, the
Committee believes that an increase in the risk of tumour induction
proportionate to the radiation dose is consistent with developing
knowledge and that it remains, accordingly, the most scientifically
defensible approximation of low-dose response. However, a strictly
linear dose response should not be expected in all circumstances </blockquote>
<b>The Controversy</b><br />
<br />
Radiation can be harmful. Everyone seems to agree with that. What people can't always agree about is the effect of very small doses of radiation. Anyway<a href="http://www.radiationanswers.org/radiation-and-me/controversy.html"> Here is</a> a page that does a good job of describing the controversy. If you want to understand this subject better <a href="http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/Biological_mechanisms_WP_12-57831.pdf">this is</a> worth reading. <br />
<br />
Living things evolved in a world full of radiation. Various biological defence mechanisms have come about in order to protect organisms from it and other sources of harm. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2663584/">Here is</a> a list of some of our bodies defences. <br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Defences against the metabolically induced reactive oxygen species (i.e. defence against things that have been ionized), <i> </i></li>
<li><i></i>DNA repair, and <i> </i></li>
<li><i></i>Elimination of damaged cells. </li>
</ol>
The big disagreement is low levels of radiation, where it is difficult to show statistically what is going on. There are several different models that describe the effects of radiation at low doses. <br />
<br />
<b>Another model is the threshold model</b><br />
<br />
This model says that only radiation over a certain dose is harmful.<br />
<br />
<b>Organizations that support this model</b><br />
<br />
French Academy of Sciences (<i>Académie des Sciences</i>) and the National Academy of Medicine (<i>Académie nationale de Médecine</i>).<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In conclusion, this report raises doubts on the validity of using LNT
for evaluating the carcinogenic risk of low doses (< 100 mSv) and
even more for very low doses (< 10 mSv). The LNT concept can be a
useful pragmatic tool for assessing rules in radioprotection for doses
above 10 mSv; however since it is not based on biological concepts of
our current knowledge, it should not be used without precaution for
assessing by extrapolation the risks associated with low and even more
so, with very low doses (< 10 mSv), especially for benefit-risk
assessments imposed on radiologists by the European directive 97-43.</blockquote>
<b>Hormesis Model</b><br />
<br />
Another model is the is the <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2663584/">hormesis model</a> which postulates that a certain amount of radiation actually decreases your chance of getting cancer a little because it stimulates your body's natural defences.<br />
<br />
<b>What People agree About</b><br />
<br />
At any rate pretty much everyone agree about larger doses so <a href="http://www.radiationanswers.org/radiation-and-me/effects-of-radiation.html">Here are</a> a few facts I think anyone would agree with. <br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>100 rem received in a short time can cause observable health
effects from which your body will likely recover, and will increase your
chances of getting cancer. </li>
<li>1,000 rem in a short or long period of time will cause
immediately observable health effects and is likely to cause death.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Conclusion </span></b><br />
<br />
<br />
As for conclusions there isn't one really. Hope this was helpful to someone.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9Mhb0ZBjWrUKwZHAEO5jeT121M2fTjGVgOSFmIxq7p53Eggv8lMNpph2mEjR5vv71pzszLVAyLu5U4UxPZYvj7eED3B2tzfWAM0JCWKmO7syaMTM7XJ2G_HwZsy4S2Fvzjz8q8U34acw/s1600/bye+bye.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9Mhb0ZBjWrUKwZHAEO5jeT121M2fTjGVgOSFmIxq7p53Eggv8lMNpph2mEjR5vv71pzszLVAyLu5U4UxPZYvj7eED3B2tzfWAM0JCWKmO7syaMTM7XJ2G_HwZsy4S2Fvzjz8q8U34acw/s1600/bye+bye.png" /></a></div>
<br />
Update: I've made a lot of changes in order to make it more complete. Also, changes some things to make it more balanced.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-54959347943481580952015-01-04T10:32:00.001-08:002015-01-07T18:47:57.923-08:00Random Idea Number One<b>Disclaimer:</b> Occasionally I get ideas about random things. I love
thinking about how to solve problems. Even though not all my ideas are good ones, or
things that I think should be done, it's still fun to share. So I thought
about it and decided it might be fun make blog posts about them. <br />
<br />
Recently I've been reading <a href="http://ourfiniteworld.com/2014/12/07/ten-reasons-why-a-severe-drop-in-oil-prices-is-a-problem/">people complaining</a> about the low oil price, and I was thinking about why the US government doesn't buy and store it in order to keep the price at some set level. Then I started thinking about how they might store it. I figured the EPA might make this difficult and expensive. Thinking about it some more what I finally came up with was abandon open pit mines.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEB-K8qR6Ua5CiwYES_92YB6OVHbtuJOWzbRCshwH7tOrVU48JCi6DIYVkEtwMWGf7810sUbgal_0Y0ekF9JRA6o_ARkm6O5-3rPTTuN3jFzAwcoyow6ZF9_gqGKZVcnqtNcSH_zgJkLA/s1600/Opin+pit+mines.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEB-K8qR6Ua5CiwYES_92YB6OVHbtuJOWzbRCshwH7tOrVU48JCi6DIYVkEtwMWGf7810sUbgal_0Y0ekF9JRA6o_ARkm6O5-3rPTTuN3jFzAwcoyow6ZF9_gqGKZVcnqtNcSH_zgJkLA/s1600/Opin+pit+mines.jpeg" /></a></div>
<br />
They are already environmental problem spots so maybe people would be less against it. Then I started thinking about how to seal them so the oil doesn't leak into the ground, and I remembered that because of <a href="http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20140520/NEWS/140529999/china-quells-waste-imports-recycling-still-continues-to-grow">China's recent policies</a> recycled plastic prices are down. Maybe they could be sealed with Polly Propylene or HDPE. Then I started thinking about how to apply the plastic, and what I came up with was something like a giant heat gun that would both blow plastic chips onto the surface and melt them. Maybe a <a href="http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=359507.0">converted jet engine</a> would do the job.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiigXm3th7C_20c_BCWRJpxK7Chy0SO2Ujlck6kOyrQC6hP3bj-asEcupKXjCSkhA0Yhuw4x_oKmbLsAS8Xuk-Sgh0wf8Z0t_dElXw7yNuOn-pXJ-wWzbU0YQn9lYdXaJDopcFvSf94oYU/s1600/Jet+engine.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiigXm3th7C_20c_BCWRJpxK7Chy0SO2Ujlck6kOyrQC6hP3bj-asEcupKXjCSkhA0Yhuw4x_oKmbLsAS8Xuk-Sgh0wf8Z0t_dElXw7yNuOn-pXJ-wWzbU0YQn9lYdXaJDopcFvSf94oYU/s1600/Jet+engine.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Then I started thinking this might be useful for storing other things then oil (Such as fresh water). Then I thought that this could be a good investment for people. Oil went down because of a small oversupply but it's bound to come up again eventually. People could maybe double their money in a few years. Well that's all my thought on it. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-26773914583606419062014-12-22T17:51:00.000-08:002015-01-13T16:14:28.824-08:00Comparing Aviation and Nuclear Power's Safety Record for 2014It often seems like people zero in on the dangers of certain things while largely ignoring the dangers of others. For example commercial airlines. People are often more afraid of flying then they are of driving, and if they've been watching the news this year they would probably feel justified in their fears as this year has seen news story after news story about downed and missing airliners, but things are not always as they appear to be. In 2014 <a href="http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/07/travel/aviation-data/">761 people died</a> on commercial airlines world wide while a staggering <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm">33,783 people died</a> in automotive accidents in the US alone. Things can look a lot different when you compare statistic than they do when you just go by gut feeling, or what makes the news more often. Often people consider nuclear power to be dangerous. Far more dangerous then flying, but I wonder if that's really the case. That's why I'd like to try and compare Aviation and Nuclear Power safety record for 2014. <br />
<span style="font-size: large;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Accidental Deaths </b></span><br />
<br />
The first comparison is talking about the number of people directly killed as a result of the different activities. This comparison doesn't deal with radiation. That's up next. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="font-size: small;">Aviation</span> </b></span><br />
Well we got 761 death for commercial aviation.<br />
<br />
<b>Nuclear Power </b><br />
<a href="http://www.independent.ie/world-news/nuclear-workers-die-in-gas-alert-30863236.html">Three people died</a> in and industrial accident while constructing a nuclear reactor. They most likely <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inert_gas_asphyxiation">died of asphyxiation</a> from breath pure nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is sometimes <a href="http://www.uigi.com/nitrogen.html">used in construction</a>. <br />
<br />
<b>Conclusion</b> <br />
761 is much larger then 3. Point 1 goes to nuclear.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Radiation Exposure </b></span><br />
<br />
This section is for comparing radiation exposures between the two activities. Some useful information: 1,000 nSv = 1 µSv, 1,000 µSv = 1 mSv, and 1,000 mSv = 1Sv. Sv stands for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert">Sievert </a>which is a unit used to measure the effect of low levels of ionizing radiation on the human body<br />
<br />
<b>Aviation </b><br />
Lets start with commercial aviation. On commercial airlines people are exposed to higher the normal levels of ionizing radiation because of their altitude. Basically there's ionizing radiation coming from space (i.e. cosmic radiation). A lot of it gets blocked by our atmosphere, but not all of it, and when you higher you receive large <span id="docs-internal-guid-86e1b73c-74c5-19bb-0e6e-b401313d55bb" style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">doses</span> (also being closer to the equator gets you higher dosages). So lets try and calculating how much radiation exposure results from air traffic.<br />
<br />
According to the FAA Revenue Passenger Miles (An RPM represents one
paying passenger travelling one mile) where <a href="http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=13394">815 billion in 2011 </a>and
expected to be 1.57 trillion in 2032. That's as close as I could get to 2014 with my Google skills, but It probably hasn't changed that much in three years so I'll just go with it. I couldn’t find information on
total hours passenger spent travelled so but a commercial jet <a href="http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JobyJosekutty.shtml">travels between 500 to 900 km/hr</a>. With that and a little math we get 1.46 to 2.62 billion total hours flown by
paying customers in 2011, and a projected 2.81 to 5.05 billion total
hours flown by paying customers in 2032. <br />
<br />
That is a lot of hours. Next lets look at what people are exposed to
during those hours. The amount of radiation people are exposed to
during flight depends on both altitude and latitude, so in order to get
a better idea of the rate of exposure people can reasonably expect
during commercial flights lets look at some data taken from <a href="http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/commercialflights.html">Xinjiang Airlines</a>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Feng YJ, Chen WR, Sun TP, Duan SY, Jia BS, Zhang HL.</b> Estimated cosmic radiation doses for flight personnel. Space Med Med Eng 15(4):265–269; 2002.<br />
<ul>
<li>The average effective dose rate of all flights of Xinjiang Airlines from 1997 to 1999 was 2.38 µSv h<sup>-1</sup>.</li>
<li>The average annual cosmic radiation dose for flight personnel was 2.19 mSv.</li>
<li>Annual individual doses of all monitored flight personnel are well below the limit of 20 mSv y<sup>-1</sup> recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
Now we need to know the average world wide natural background radiation so we know how much more people get while flying. Using <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation#Natural_background_radiation">Wikipedia </a>I got this 0.27 µSv/h (Derived from 2.4 mSv a year) So with a bit of subtraction I get 2.11µSv/h (2.38 - 0.27 = 2.11) more radiation from flying. Using this we have 1.46 Gh to 2.62 Gh times 2.11 µSv which equals 3,100 Sv (3,080,600,000 µSv) to 5,500 Sv (5,528,200,000 µSv). If you <a href="http://www.wise-uranium.org/rdcri.html">applied</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model">Linear No-Threshold Model</a> to that it would equal 155 to 275 extra cases of cancer for one year of commercial flight, projected to almost double by 2032. To put that number in perspective <a href="http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2012/EE/c2ee22019a#!divAbstract">this study</a> estimates a total of 130 fatal cancers as a result of the Fukushima nuclear accident. Though <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2663584/">some people</a> contest the validity of applying the Linear No-Threshold Model to low levels of exposure. <br />
<br />
I looked for information about military aviation exposure, but couldn't find anything so I'll leave that out. I'm also leaving out commercial pilots. They fly aircraft for other reasons, such as charter
flights, rescue operations, firefighting, aerial photography, and aerial
application, also known as crop dusting. I have no clue what kinds of does they get. For things like crop dusting I'm guessing not a lot. <br />
<br />
For information about flight attendants and pilot. I was able to get some employment numbers. There were <a href="http://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/flight-attendants.htm">84,800</a> jobs for flight attendants, and for airline pilots there were 66,760 <a href="http://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/airline-and-commercial-pilots.htm">(104,100</a> - <a href="http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes532012.htm">37,340</a> = 66,760) job. From the study quoted above we get 2.19 mSv does for flight personnel each year so that adds another 330 Sv (331916.4 mSv = 2.19 mSv (66760+84800)). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Next lets talk about space. Do to the lack of atmosphere astronauts get higher dosage than most professions do. So lets try and calculate that. The international space station has six crew spots and they've been <a href="http://www.howmanypeopleareinspacerightnow.com/">filled</a> all year round. I've <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0074988">found this</a> information about their doses.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX4XFy95PBMqgROS6lBb2pZbphxuGVeacdYaZXeWE0SMPv_R1Ryg9ZXsq0VPdO8qU-hfT6qCtfLfHZN4U-5tiU4XX9G3_Emf8-1WtmPTCayYtwM2DE84OK3y0UyUQAvZ_yhMJH3WgkKfw/s1600/Untitled.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX4XFy95PBMqgROS6lBb2pZbphxuGVeacdYaZXeWE0SMPv_R1Ryg9ZXsq0VPdO8qU-hfT6qCtfLfHZN4U-5tiU4XX9G3_Emf8-1WtmPTCayYtwM2DE84OK3y0UyUQAvZ_yhMJH3WgkKfw/s1600/Untitled.JPG" height="200" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The green line is the one that matters to us.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
The number on the left are for annual mSv. The number one the bottoms describe aluminium shielding with 0 being zero shielding and 100 being the most shielding. Looking at the green line, at solar minimum it looks like they get up to 225 mSv unshielded, and down to around 75 mSv shielded by aluminium. I'm just going to assume they're shielded most of the time and call it 100 mSv a year. There are 6 people on the station all year round so we end up with 600 mSv.<br />
<br />
All together for aviation 2014 we get between 3,430.6 Sv to 5,830.6 Sv. There are a lot of things I've left out like <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25199125">solar particle events</a>, but given my limited resources and waning patience this will have to do. <br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>Nuclear Power </b><br />
When you think nuclear and radiation the first thing on a lot of
people's minds these days seems to be Fukushima. So I did some
searching and found one map that shows up to date <a href="http://jciv.iidj.net/map/">radiation
readings</a>, and the other map shows the c<a href="http://www.meti.go.jp/english/earthquake/nuclear/roadmap/pdf/20130807_01.pdf">urrent
evacuated areas</a>. Here are the two maps side by side at roughly the same scale (I think).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxzFxIJFIawxCzx2Rf_QTr3AY5pwLQvWfKkJA5mf4gbaol2kHJWfn2Rwud7V2r108FAslkix7MKbCYXcsXtTJuDeD9AMjh7j_aPa7GzXJlbTP7lTD9EwSxx-jkppjX0cWu1zraxlST1KQ/s1600/JapMap3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxzFxIJFIawxCzx2Rf_QTr3AY5pwLQvWfKkJA5mf4gbaol2kHJWfn2Rwud7V2r108FAslkix7MKbCYXcsXtTJuDeD9AMjh7j_aPa7GzXJlbTP7lTD9EwSxx-jkppjX0cWu1zraxlST1KQ/s1600/JapMap3.jpg" height="225" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I find these maps rather interesting in
light of what I've learned about aviation. Consider 2.38 µSv/h the the average does for airlines that I used
above. If I wrote this like the radiation readings map it
would be 2,380 nSv/h, and would be accompanied by an ominous red
dot. It becomes even more interesting when you consider that
2.38 is just an average. Depending on the type of flight exposure
can be much higher. From an <a href="http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/commercialflights.html">earlier link</a>. <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Friedberg W, Copeland K, Duke FE, O'Brien K 3<sup>rd</sup>, Darden EB Jr.</b> Radiation exposure during air travel: Guidance provided by the FAA for air carrier crews. Health Phys 79(5):591–595; 2000.<br />
<ul>
<li>Seattle to Portland: 0.03 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
<li>New York to Chicago: 0.39 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
<li>Los Angeles to Honolulu: 0.26 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
<li>London to New York: 0.51 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
<li>Athens to New York: 0.63 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
<li>Tokyo to New York: 0.55 mSv per 100 block hours</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
On the first map a flight from Athens to New York would be listed as 6,300 nSv/h. Furthermore the space station data from Nasa would get purple dots with the heights level of shielding getting 8,560 nSv/h, and no shielding getting 25,700(much higher than anything on the Fukushima map). I find it ironic that people can get on a plane and travel halfway around the world, or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tourism#List_of_flown_space_tourists">even go to space</a>, while <a href="http://fukushimaontheglobe.com/the-earthquake-and-the-nuclear-accident/situation-of-the-evacuees">thousands of Japanese people</a> aren't even allowed to travel the handful of miles needed to see their own homes.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately while this investigation was interesting to me it didn't really give me an idea of what doses people are getting because of Fukushima. I was starting to worry that I would ever get the information I need but luckily <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation">Wikipedia</a> came to my rescue again (The same page even). From that article I got an average of 0.0002 mSv a year exposure worldwide. Knowing that there are around <a href="http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/">7.3 billion people</a> on earth we can do a little math and get 1,460 Sv ((7,300,000,000 * .0002)/1000 = 1,460) a year exposure from nuclear power.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b>Conclusion</b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
With between between 3,430.6 Sv to
5,830.6 Sv. from aviation and 1,460 Sv from nuclear power. Point 2 goes to nuclear. What an upset victory! </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Terrorist Threat</span></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Terrorist threats are on a lot of people minds these day. People keep worrying about what they might be up to next. So the question this time is what is more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Nuclear power plants or aviation. Something like this is really hard to put a number on. Luckily Wikipedia came to my rescue again with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014">List of terrorist incidents in 2014</a>. I'm just going to add up all the ones that had to do with nuclear power or aviation. The one that gets the least wins.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="font-size: small;">Aviation</span></b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Aviation has a bit of history o<span style="font-size: small;">f</span> <span style="font-size: small;">terrorism</span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"> with the whole <span style="font-size: small;">T</span>win <span style="font-size: small;">T</span>owers thing. Lets see how <span style="font-size: small;">it</span> <span style="font-size: small;">fared</span> this year. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br id="docs-internal-guid-5b354d1b-73eb-a242-9a48-a32c2436f801" /></span>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="margin-left: 0pt;">
<table style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none;"><colgroup><col width="48"></col><col width="90"></col><col width="52"></col><col width="61"></col><col width="90"></col><col width="215"></col><col width="95"></col></colgroup><tbody>
<tr style="height: 0px;"><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Date</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Type</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Dead</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Injured </span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Location</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Details</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Perpetrator</span></div>
</td></tr>
<tr style="height: 0px;"><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Feb.</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">13</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Car bomb</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">7</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">19</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Somalia" height="20px;" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_pHs4IR2u8fLMpfcu_tI39-uZbOzm-emRzSZ9UOkTB301BnhigK9P0jvJThcNWTn_U0IYW3gfnpmPCOu0rGYokV_Dw6y1NetEtVoPgbYYSJBNXDh84OpJ3sgHrKaTZsxdQ" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="31px;" /></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mogadishu" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Mogadishu</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">,</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Somalia</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">A
remote control car bomb exploded near the international airport in
Mogadishu as a convoy of U.N vehicles traveled by, damaging one of the
U.N vehicles, killing seven Somali civilians and injuring 15 civilians
and four security guards. No U.N. Somali or International staff were
injured or killed in the terrorist attack.</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014#cite_note-69" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: super;">[68]</span></a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014#cite_note-70" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: super;">[69]</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Al Shabab</span></div>
</td></tr>
<tr style="height: 0px;"><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">June</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">8</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Attack</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">14 (+10 terrorists)</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">14</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Pakistan" height="20px;" src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/SsK5itHgpJt240hxjveuYYXWdA5oUwlwIOC5XqgtQE3O5H1qT6L74DW0IsJV9VHPr_J-wd-siALzS_CmwwAjZaofl6wplb_Fw11Q6mhZbBgMBtrQ-iTD0FTD4O3e3MssCw" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="31px;" /></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Karachi</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">,</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Pakistan</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Gunmen stormed</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinnah_International_Airport" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Jinnah International Airport</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">, killing 24 people and injuring 14 others.</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014#cite_note-161" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: super;">[160]</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehrik-i-Taliban_Pakistan" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan</span></a></div>
</td></tr>
<tr style="height: 0px;"><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">June</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">21</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Attack</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">0</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">0</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Afghanistan" height="20px;" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/Ji1v7NbcrDa14HsHMaSQLOB6kxobH9jnS_iAc-pmOwjijtrOjno7kWhgIt0HwKL-lM4Nr1goVrAQF49zg_2u2uYgBA9plnMpIdfqFFohVJbQ92Zo9wsPGuR9dBYsEXRUcw" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="31px;" /></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalalabad" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Jalalabad</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">,</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Afghanistan</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Taliban fighters fired eight rockets at a</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalalabad" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Jalalabad</span></a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">NATO</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> air base. No casualties or property damage were reported.</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014#cite_note-Huffington_Post-182" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: super;">[181]</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Taliban</span></a></div>
</td></tr>
<tr style="height: 0px;"><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">June</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">26</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Suicide bombing, shootout, raid</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">13</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">n/a</span></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Yemen" height="20px;" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/GgVnP7oaiEAgD3tQ9AfpH5uYhtNdLfbKdiF1RKFqDej4ObOq0fdW2F0PRJae1rN4WHD6T29sQ7Dxp_uifhjHOvpUxCiRL_vd_Zq1ZKoVRRubNqtduwm2GxsLzZ5uSJ504w" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="31px;" /></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seiyun" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Seiyun</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">,</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemen" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Yemen</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Assailants conducted a series of attacks in the</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seiyun" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Seiyun</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">,</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemen" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Yemen</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">.
In one attack a suicide bomber drove an explosive-laden vehicle into
the entrance of an army base, killing four soldiers. In another attack,
non-state militants attempted to raid</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seiyun" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Seiyun</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">'s
airport, killing two soldiers. The government killed four militants in
order to regain control of the airport. In another attack, a civilian
woman was killed by an agricultural plant.</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2014#cite_note-194" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: super;">[19</span></a></div>
</td><td style="border-bottom: solid #000000 1px; border-left: solid #000000 1px; border-right: solid #000000 1px; border-top: solid #000000 1px; padding: 7px 7px 7px 7px; vertical-align: top;"><div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda_in_the_Arabian_Peninsula" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula</span></a></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span></div>
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Nuclear Power</span></span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">There <span style="font-size: small;">was</span>n't any.</span></span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Conc<span style="font-size: small;">lusion</span></span></span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Nuclear wins again. The<span style="font-size: small;">re are a lot <span style="font-size: small;">of things about <span style="font-size: small;">airports that make them good targets. <span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">For example l</span>ot<span style="font-size: small;">s of people going in and out leaving hol<span style="font-size: small;">es in security<span style="font-size: small;">. Also, they</span> often<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> exist <span style="font-size: small;">in places that have a lot of <span style="font-size: small;">terrorists making them conveniently<span style="font-size: small;"> located targets for them to <span style="font-size: small;">lash out at the 'evil' <span style="font-size: small;">foreigners</span></span>. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">The <span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: large;">Dangers</span></span> of War </span></b> </span></span></span></span></span> </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">I'm not really sure that this is comparison is really needed, but people often argue that nuclear power is a nuclear weapons proliferation threat so I figured I better at least mention it. My own view is that technical advancement of any kind is a nuclear proliferation threat. If you want to keep someone from getting nuclear weapons you have to basically keep them down so that they can not make anything that can threaten you. Such a practice is unethical in my opinion, and counter productive because poor miserable people are more likely to be violent. Really instead of holding some people down I think we should bring everyone up so that we can all enjoy the fruits of technological progress together. Then I think the world would be a much safer friendlier place. In the end I declare this category a tie because I can not quantify this in any way that I find meaningful.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Final Conclusion</span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br /><b><span style="font-size: small;">Nuclear win<span style="font-size: small;">s!</span></span></b></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgon4UGNneV6Dm6WmUP2Gy5BYCUXBt_umctmWvzWI5A-_K8Ft2kJyWAWmBoVc0AHZjTipeJUlw_VwacBtNu6o-ttw_Pj6VUwZzm5GRY2pdmz407cQwNu2cIEFVTl8c4z9neDhG3q3pjUsw/s1600/Victory.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgon4UGNneV6Dm6WmUP2Gy5BYCUXBt_umctmWvzWI5A-_K8Ft2kJyWAWmBoVc0AHZjTipeJUlw_VwacBtNu6o-ttw_Pj6VUwZzm5GRY2pdmz407cQwNu2cIEFVTl8c4z9neDhG3q3pjUsw/s1600/Victory.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;">Whether or not this article changes your mind about anything I hope you enjoyed it, and it at least made you think. </span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZr6ge6Hgco5Ztuz4lG5YllkSlT6iZYqdBwHSLYZeRSyVseNWJbJC98WUFTrh9s_YcNHmYHhWj6QRYqO5duXZ7lvx4cXOpWx9foWSx8Sy8jeCKbd9XXaunytCoGCrbYGXlhiDTl5qwjIY/s1600/Happy+Holiday.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZr6ge6Hgco5Ztuz4lG5YllkSlT6iZYqdBwHSLYZeRSyVseNWJbJC98WUFTrh9s_YcNHmYHhWj6QRYqO5duXZ7lvx4cXOpWx9foWSx8Sy8jeCKbd9XXaunytCoGCrbYGXlhiDTl5qwjIY/s1600/Happy+Holiday.jpeg" height="102" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span> </span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span></span> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span> </span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-87591197998645295322014-01-02T02:08:00.000-08:002015-03-07T17:30:14.036-08:00The Hidden Costs of Wind and Solar: Part II intermittency (i.e. variability)Wind and solar are intermittent (i.e. The wind isn't always
blowing and the sun isn’t always shining). This creates costs that need to be accounted for properly.<br />
<br />
Lets start by talking about the electric grid sense understand it is important for understanding the issues with intermittency. With the electric grids the amount of
electric power produced always needs to equal the amount used. Matching production and use with uncontrollable and difficult to predict sources like wind
and solar can be tricky. Things like clouds and changes in wind speed
can cause problems. One way of understanding this problem is to think of the electric like a giant bucket.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The Western Grid is like a giant bucket," said <span id="redesign_default"><span id="MNGiSection">Mark Avery, SRP's grid manager</span></span> "with a bunch of
spouts running in and out, and you have to keep the water level
constant."<span id="redesign_default"><span id="MNGiSection"> </span></span><a href="http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_24381116/power-grid-may-determine-whether-we-can-kick">The Denver Post </a></blockquote>
<br />
Picturing the electric
grid as a giant bucket. Some people are taking cups of water (electric power)
and pouring them into the bucket while others are taking cups of water
out of the bucket. If the bucket become empty it’s bad because people
can’t get their water, and it’s also bad if the bucket gets too much
water and starts overflowing. The water in the bucket isn't very deep
(just enough for someone to get a cup full) so the rate of the water
going into the bucket has to precisely match the rate of the water
coming out of the bucket. If there is only one person drawing water from
the bucket this can be difficult to do. One person is fairly
unpredictable. What if he all the sudden decides he wants a lot of
water, or what if he all the sudden decides he doesn't need any for a
while. This makes load following (i.e. making sure the right level of water is always present) more difficult and less efficient. Lucky the actions of a lot of people average out into something
much easier to predict. So in order to deal with the problem they made
the buck wider (but still just as deep) so many people can draw out
their cups of water at once.<br />
<br />
This system worked well enough (most of the time).
Then one day some new people (i.e. wind and solar advocates) decided that they wanted to put their cups
of water into the bucket as well, but other people didn't want them to
because they couldn't control when they put the water into the bucket, and because they also couldn't predict it with perfect accuracy. The new people
said it would be fine, and that just like with people taking water out
of the bucket things would become more predictable if they just made the
buck wider so more people could put their cups of water into the bucket
at once. Then once things became predictable the people that could
control the rate they put water into the bucket would help match
everything up.<br />
<br />
So how well does this new way work? Opinions vary, but personally I am very sceptical that adding different types of
unpredictability together will somehow make things more manageable. One
thing’s for certain, the electric grid is not really a bucket. It is an
expensive complex machine, and making it do what the renewable energy
advocates want makes it even more complex and expensive. I think that’s why they
are always saying things like “we need to upgrade our archaic electric
grid” or “we need a smart grid”. Sure the electric grid (just like
roads) needs maintenance, occasion expansions and even upgrades; but I believe that the biggest reason they are pushing so hard is because they want the money
needed to integrate more solar pv and wind without having to included
that money in the costs of those technologies. <br />
<br />
So what happens when things don't match up? Well larger difference cause
Power outages while smaller differences cause other power quality issues. Both of these things have costs. A Berkeley Lab Study estimates that power interruptions cost the US <a href="http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-power-interruptions.html">$80 Billion annually</a>.<br />
<br />
Lets talk a little bit more about power quality. What is power quality? Opinions vary but here is <a href="http://www.cpccorp.com/pq.htm">one definition</a> I found useful.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Power quality is simply the interaction of electrical power with electrical equipment. If electrical equipment operates correctly and reliably without being damaged or stressed, we would say that the electrical power is of good quality. On the other hand, if the electrical equipment malfunctions, is unreliable, or is damaged during normal usage, we would suspect that the power quality is poor."</blockquote>
<br />
We have standard for voltage, frequency and phase. Then we make devices that run off those standards. If the power difference to much from the standard then devices won't work properly or they can even be damaged. Both Solar pv and wind can cause power quality issues (e.g. can deregulate line voltages and sometimes in extreme circumstances even shifting the line phase ). Google the words wind and solar along with power quality and you can learn about the various issues and proposed solutions, or you can watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJtv7gkuh1s">this video</a> (I highly recommended it). There are <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/instability-in-power-grid-comes-at-high-cost-for-german-industry-a-850419.html">sighs Germany is already having problems</a> with it’s level of
penetration.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"short interruptions in the grid has increased by <a href="http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/germanys-rebellion-against-wind-power-picks-up-pace/">29 per cent in the past three years </a>– resulting in some firms on the grid reporting damage
running into hundreds of thousands of euros as a result of unexpected
stoppages."</blockquote>
Manufacturing <a href="http://www.edcmag.com/articles/overcoming-power-quality-problems-in-industrial-manufacturing-environments">requires good power quality </a>which solar/wind can have trouble supplying. This is especially true for manufacturing <a href="http://www.hitec-ups.com/?RubriekID=3525">high tech things</a> like solar panels. There have been attempts to deal with the problem with things like battery back up at the source, but there are still signs that large amounts of wind and solar can <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/instability-in-power-grid-comes-at-high-cost-for-german-industry-a-850419.html">cause problems</a>. In order to cope with these problems manufactures need to spend money on special systems (for example system
that use battery backup), but such things have costs. However the problem is dealt with (e.g. at the source, smart grids and/or making the end users deal with it) there are costs that should be
included in the price of wind and solar.<br />
<br />
The variability of wind and solar means that other types of energy generation have to ramp up and down more often in order to match electric production with use. This creates inefficiencies which have costs that should be attributed to wind and solar. <br />
<br />
A good way to understand these inefficiencies is to compare electric generation to something most people are familiar with. Cars are<a href="http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.jsp"> more efficient</a> when they are driven a certain way. For example.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"While each vehicle reaches its optimal fuel economy at a different speed (or range of speeds), gas mileage usually decreases rapidly at speeds above 50 mph."</blockquote>
Power plants also have an optimal fuel economy when operated at a certain continuous output. They call plants made to operate at their optimal fuel economy <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_load_power_plant">Base load Power Plants</a> and anything that causes them to very from their continuous optimal output creates inefficiencies that have costs. Some of that cost should be attributed to wind and solar (The rest of it should be attributed to things like changing demand). <br />
<br />
It's important to note that power plant not operating at their optimal output because they are being used for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following">load following</a>(i.e. being used to help match electric production with use) are performing a service for the gird. This service is called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_reserve">spinning reserve</a> and studies have been conducted to try and estimate how much it costs. <a href="http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=TR-107270-V4%20%20%20%20%20%20&Mode=download">One such study</a> is quoted below. <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"An expected finding from case studies made to date is that the specific cost of power generated in spinning reserve mode is quite high compared to the optimum cost of power from the same unit. This is, of course, due to the poor heat rate of most thermal power units at low load. If the unit could have operated at high load instead of spinning reserve, there is a lost opportunity cost which may double the cost of the spinning reserve service."</blockquote>
<br />
Next is another comparison between cars and power plants. <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use. Turn off your engine when your vehicle is parked. It only takes a few seconds worth of fuel to restart your vehicle. Turning your engine on and off excessively, however, may increase starter wear."</blockquote>
<br />
Unlike internal combustion engines base load power plants can't start up that easily (<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #0000ee;"><u><a href="http://www.wartsila.com/en/reciprocating-engine-vs-gas-turbine-startup-time">Some can take more than 12 hours to reach full load</a></u></span><span style="color: #191919; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 15px;">)</span></span></span>. How long it takes to start a base load power plant varies based on numerous factors. One such factor is how hot it is. Cold starts take the longest while warm and hot starts take less time. Trying to get the plant online too fast can result in unnecessary plant failure or wear. This bring us to another cost that is increased by intermittency. Intermittency increases <a href="https://encrypted.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=cold%20start%20power%20plant&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CD4QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwind.nrel.gov%2Fpublic%2Fwwis%2Faptechfinalv2.pdf&ei=Nt_EUoTBA5LgoASEn4CoDg&usg=AFQjCNGoio9Tuu_Y-XRj1HodEoTuiK2j2w&sig2=ZqlJa6JC4wAjqnUjyNb3aA&bvm=bv.58187178,d.cGU">Power Plant Cycling Costs</a>. Power Plant Cycling Costs are the increased costs of maintenance and forced outages caused by things like turning the plant on/off, load following, and minimum load operation, in response to changes in system load requirements. There are ways to reduce these costs like keeping the plants hot, but such things also have costs. <br />
<br />
Another costs of intermittency is as the cost of underutilized capital assets. A good example of an underutilized
capital asset would be a power plant that only runs a few month out of the
year when its too cloudy for solar pv, or a transmission line going to a
wind farm that has to be build to handle that wind farm’s maximum
capacity even though on average the wind farm only delivers 30 percent
of that. Here is a <a href="http://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/downloads-englisch/pdf-files-englisch/news/electricity-production-from-solar-and-wind-in-germany-in-2013.pdf">good example of the problem</a> from Germany.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3YKdW05TdwuudDq-EOa-kHBZfThJ8WX21_6Not_CD5GG4Z7oxUEOpmljVUgBORg1cO-Mng9H3BiBl6tgqd0oj3N8wyngzoCFY-RRK8cJZeL-Ng7s9aWfGUG4DZypWqc4BxmKZV9u0spc/s1600/output.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3YKdW05TdwuudDq-EOa-kHBZfThJ8WX21_6Not_CD5GG4Z7oxUEOpmljVUgBORg1cO-Mng9H3BiBl6tgqd0oj3N8wyngzoCFY-RRK8cJZeL-Ng7s9aWfGUG4DZypWqc4BxmKZV9u0spc/s400/output.jpg" height="307" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
As you can see there are days in January with almost no wind or solar production. The question you might be asking yourself is how do they get power when wind and solar aren't there for them. What happens is that people end up having to have two power systems. The conventional power system (mostly coal in Germany) which is able to meat all of the countries needs plus an extra wind and solar system which can't be relied upon. Both of these systems have to be paid for which as you can imagination is quit costly. A lot of people seem to think that
some costs don’t count, but if people want to continue to enjoy electricity on demand 24/7/365 then they do count and they <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20131127-708349.html?dsk=y">need to get paid</a>. <br />
<br />
In conclusion there are reasons why electric
prices are higher in places that embrace solar and wind. The sticker price they show you isn't even close to all that you'll have to fork out. This shouldn't be allowed to go on. There need to be a better accounting of the true costs of producing electricity with different methods. Some people have already<a href="http://www.oecd-nea.org/ndd/reports/2012/system-effects-exec-sum.pdf"> started on it</a>, but a lot more work need to be done.<br />
<br />
Update Mar 4 2015: Made some changes on things I didn't like. Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315386763198461000.post-75043868020811034822013-11-23T18:35:00.000-08:002014-01-02T14:58:44.211-08:00The Hidden Costs of Wind and Solar: Part I Power DensityRenewable energy is a strange term. What does it really mean to be
renewable when even that giant nuclear reactor is the sky will burn
itself out eventually? Looking at <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/renewable+energy">a dictionary </a>we get this.<br />
<br />
“Any naturally occurring, theoretically inexhaustible source of
energy, as biomass, solar, wind, tidal, wave, and hydroelectric power,
that is not derived from fossil or nuclear fuel.”<br />
<br />
So renewable energy has to not be derived from fossil or nuclear fuel, yet the sun uses nuclear fuel, and most thing that go under the title renewable energy (i.e. biomass, solar, wind, tidal, wave, and hydroelectric power) are derived derived from sunlight so this definition contradicts itself.<br />
<br />
Personally I think that “renewable” is just a rhetorical device
used to try to make certain types of energy seem better than the alternatives, but my purpose here isn’t just to criticize
people’s terminology. Really when people are talking about switching to
renewable energy they are talking about wind turbines and solar pv.
These are the two ‘white knights’ that people think are going to save us
all from the evil nuclear and fossil fuel industry, so these are the
two energy sources I’m going to talk about.<br />
<br />
The cost of wind, and solar can be placed in two categories. One
category includes things like the cost of things like wind turbines,
solar panels and grid tied inverters. There are plenty of sources that
talk about those costs so I’m not going to. Instead I’m going to talk about the second category which
is the hidden costs of wind and solar pv.<br />
<br />
The two biggest sources for the hidden costs of wind and solar
are their low power density, and the intermittency of those sources.<br />
<br />
Power density is the power per unit of area. It’s an important
consideration because it describes how much space you need to fill your
energy requirements. The power density of wind and solar are low, which
means that to supply most of our power from such sources would require a
lot of land. To give you an idea of how much consider this. One
estimate of the power density of solar pv is 10 w/m^2(<a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/cft.pdf">see page 41</a>), and in 2011 the
<a href="http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_01_02.html">U.S. Generated 4,100,656 Gwh</a>. These two facts taken together tell us
that if we generating all of our electricity with solar pv in 2011 then
it would have taken 46,811 square kilometers ( or 18,074 square miles).
That’s roughly the area of all the roads in the US (roads occupy <a href="http://www.artba.org/faqs/#9">17,879 square miles</a> of the land in the contiguous 48 states). Those roads weren’t
easy or cheep to build or maintain; can you imagine how much harder such
a massive solar project would be? Of course this is all academic. You
can’t really power the whole country with solar pv because solar pv
doesn’t work at night.<br />
<br />
Estimates for the power density of wind have been around 2 to 7
w/m^2, but <a href="http://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2013/02/rethinking-wind-power">new research</a> suggests that the power density of large wind
farms may actually be as low as .5 to 1 w/m^2 (Imagine wind turbines
covering an area that is 10 to 20 times the area of all the roads in the US).<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Energy from coal can also be made almost anywhere. But to make
electricity from wind, the generator has to be where the resource is,
and for wind, that means places with few major power lines. “ Matthew L. Wald in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/ideas-to-bolster-power-grid-run-up-against-the-systems-many-owners.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&">New York Times article</a>. </blockquote>
<br />
Power density is important (especially for wind) which is why
people try to situate wind and solar in places where the power density
is highest. This means a lot of transmission lines are needed to get the
power to where it’s used and those transmission lines have a cost that
needs to be accounted for. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/ideas-to-bolster-power-grid-run-up-against-the-systems-many-owners.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">One source</a> estimates that in the US between 2010 and 2030 the cost of without "renewables" would be $18.5 and the cost with "renewables" would be $115.2 billion. Also, some people argue that there are
<a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanfahey/2010/08/12/why-landowners-fight-wind-and-solar-transmission-lines/">aesthetic costs</a> (i.e. it lowers property values) to having wind turbines, solar panels and transmission
lines all over the place.<br />
<br />
If you wish to know more about Power density please read this PDF <a href="http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/sustainable/book/tex/cft.pdf">Sustainable Energy — Without the Hot Air</a>. It is written by David J.C. MacKay FRS Regius Professor of Engineering Cambridge University Engineering Department. In it he explain many of the important issues in detail in a very reader-friendly way. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the subject. It’s a bit long, but it really is worth it.<br />
<div style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-line; word-wrap: break-word;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 10px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-line; word-wrap: break-word;">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07222285661645557609noreply@blogger.com0