Pros and con of nuclear energy?
Under normal operation, a nuke plant only releases a small amount of waste heat into the nearest stream, in contrast with oil gas and coal plants which are all designed to spew greenhouses gases after fuel is burned. Nuke plants also run 24 x 7 rain or shine, unlike wind and sunlight dependent power sources. Their only disadvantage is the small and manageable amount of radioactive waste that must be stored. In the last 50 years about 50,000 tons of it has accumulated, all of which can be easily accomadated inside the Yucca Mountain storage site. There is an estimated 5 billion year supply of uranium dissolved in the earths oceans with more on the way, so it can be considered an unlimited energy source.
Advantages:Available in abundantFrom Coal Mining to Power Generation/Other Utilities it comprises of lot of activities - Both directly & Indirectly providing Employment to many person.Cheap & not expensive like other sources such as oil and gas and Nuclear energyIt doesn’t depend on weather like (wind & solar) available for 24 x 7Investment is low when compared with other energy sources of same capacity power generationwhile comparing the generation method of nuclear energy it is a safer oneDisadvantages:Combustion of Coal may produce harmful waste such as Carbon di oxide, sulphuric acid, sulphur di oxide, nitrogen oxide, etc which may lead to environment impactCoal mining leads to land sliding, deforestation, climatic change, etcIn underground mining, miners life is under risk at most of the timeit is a non renewable energy
What are the pros and cons for nuclear energy?
There are more pros than cons. It has been proven in France for example, because they use 80% of their energy from nuclear power plants, and we all see how clean and beautiful France is. From what I read and heard this type of energy production doesn't pollute. It is also very efficient, for example it can give off a lot of power from just one power plant. The things that people are worried about is: how will it be stored so that it will be safely contained in the long run. Also, another con is that the nuclear plants have to dispose the really hot water that is a byproduct of the energy created. That hot water has to be released in nearby streams and this can damage the water habitats near the sites.
Pros and cons of Landfill gas energy.?
I did a research paper on this very subject. I got an A. And for that I had to work very hard to research my sources, and compile my work. So, DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK and learn something.
What are the pros and cons of the energy source,coal?
Harmful effects of coal burning Combustion of coal, like any other compound containing carbon, produces carbon dioxide (CO2), along with varying amounts of sulfur dioxide (SO2) depending on where it was mined. Sulfur dioxide reacts with oxygen to form sulfur trioxide (SO3), which then reacts with water to form Sulfuric Acid. Sulfuric Acid is returned to the Earth as a form of acid rain Emissions from coal-fired power plants represent the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, a primary cause of global warming. Many other pollutants are present in coal power station emissions. Some studies claim that coal power plant emissions are responsible for tens of thousands of premature deaths annually in the United States alone. Modern power plants utilize a variety of techniques to limit the harmfulness of their waste products and improve the efficiency of burning, though these techniques are not widely implemented in some countries, as they add to the capital cost of the power plant. To eliminate CO2 emissions from coal plants, carbon capture and storage has been proposed but is yet to be widely used. CO2 from natural sources have long been recycled into depleted oil wells for the last of their reserves. The use of CO2 from artificial sources rarely occurs. Coal also contains many trace elements, including arsenic and mercury, which are dangerous if released into the environment. Coal also contains low levels of uranium, thorium, and other naturally-occurring radioactive isotopes whose release into the environment may lead to radioactive contamination.[6][7] While these substances are trace impurities, enough coal is burned that significant amounts of these substances are released, paradoxically resulting in more radioactive waste than nuclear power. There are more info, including the advantages on:
Pros and cons of different alternative energy?
To say that any of this is free is to misunderstand economics. The raw material, be it electromagnetic radiation, heat, kinetics, gravity, or chemical is readily available. The cost is in the effort to make it usable. In other words wind may be free, windmills are not. Geothermal works only in places where there is hot magma near the surface. Iceland has made great use of geothermal power. Solar is the most promising. Sun is readily available in much of the world (polar regions during their winter being the exception). Biggest drawback is that it isn't available at night, however power usage surges during the day so it is most available when most needed. The cost is a bit prohibitive, but technology is slowly making solar power competitive. We will see the day where in more tropical latitudes every square inch of rooftop is covered in solar panels. Wind is unsteady and usually the most available where it is least needed. The high plains have lots of wind potential, and not many people to consume it. This means long distance transmission, with its attendant costs. Hydroelectric, most of the good rivers in the west already are dammed, though there is plenty of potential in the rest of the world. Tidal and ocean currents have great potential, but the cost and technical challenges are prohibitive. Biomass, similar problems to coal and oil, puts carbon particulate matter into the air. Waste from crops or garbage is a good use of otherwise unused material, but when we go to corn or cane we are taking food supplies generally from the poorest and diverting it to energy generally for the richer world. For all these ideas, coal and oil are going to be king for quite some time to come. Actually the biggest source of untapped energy is in reducing usage, better insulation, telecommuting, smarter homes and appliances for instance.
Can you list some of the pros and cons of nuclear energy ?
Some of the advantages of Nuclear power plants are: 1. They do not produce smoke or carbon dioxide and so they do not contribute to the greenhouse effect; 2. They produce huge amounts of energy from small amounts of fuel (uranium), compared to other power plants. 3. They also produce small amounts of waste. 4. Nuclear Energy is a very reliable energy resource. The drawbacks with Nuclear Energy/Reactors are as follows: 1. Nuclear energy produced by using Uranium is non-renewable. Uranium has got the potential to be depleted through continuous mining without immediate replacement. 2. Nuclear reactors are very expensive. The cost of installing nuclear reactors have been increasing by 15% every year for the past 30 years. Installing 1 reactor costs billions of dollars these days; 3. Nuclear reactors need to be operated with care; little mistakes can cause catastrophic damages (e.g. Chernobyl Nuclear Resident Accident, in Ukraine (1986) and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in Daughin County, PennSylvania (1979)); 4. There are currently no good technology for safely managing nuclear wastes; most proposed methods are very expensive and still require proofs of reliability; and 5. Nuclear wastes or even the nuclear production material (e.g. Uranium pellets) can fall into the hands of those that would use them for destructive purposes. Nuclear energy is sometimes discouraged to minimize or prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Check the website below for further details on Nuclear Energy Good luck
Nowadays, the debate regarding nuclear power is a burning issue: after the recent tragedy in Fukushima it is seen as a dangerous source of energy. However, in a context of global warming, others such as Patrick Moore (co-founder of Greenpeace), claim that nuclear energy is the only way to curb the human impact on climate change.The main pros are:- It can help to reduce gas emission (A carbon power plant produces 6,5 million more tons of CO2 than a nuclear power plant produces).- This is a reliable source of energy: There is not risk of shortage in the following years. Uranium is evenly deposited around the world, and the actual reserves are estimated to last around 1000 years. Therefore, it is unaffected by shortage, political tensions or strikes.- The technology is already available and contrary to renewable ernergies, it is able to produce enough energy to replace fossil energy. - It is seen as a safe energy: even if some tragedies happened such as in Fukushima or Chernobyl, these are sporadic event in comparison with the incident rate in coal mines, gas pipelines .- Fusion, currently tested in Cadarache in south of France, is likely to be the energy of the future as it is supposed to be unlimited and to produced no radioactive waste.- Finally, nuclear electricity is the cheapest form of electricity generation.The main cons are:- Nuclear and radioactive accidents: After Russia, USA and recently Japan, it is the most important concern today. It is also reinforced by threats of terrorist attacks aiming at destroying nuclear power plants.- Even in normal conditions, the nuclear industry produces low level of radioactivity that are hazardous for inhabitants living close from the power station.- The difficulty to handle nuclear wastes: The wastes are stored in the underground but remain hazardous for hundred of years. In addition, nuclear waste treatment is really costly and have to be taken into account when calculating the cost of production of 1 kilo-watt hour of electricity. - The investment costs and overrun costs are tremendous: For instance the first ERP built by Areva is more than 50% over budget, for a total cost of around €5 bn- Nuclear proliferation: Some countries are suspected to develop nuclear weapons using nuclear energy program as a cover. **********************************http://www.wired.com/science/pla...http://www.metrofrance.com/fr/ar...http://world-nuclear.org/info/in...http://www.greenworldinvestor.com
What are the pros and cons of Nuclear Fusion for energy?
Pros: - hydrogen fuel is readily available and cheap to make (it occurs naturally in seawater) - fewer waste products than nuclear fission (FEWER DOESN'T MEAN NONE, as any nuclear reaction produces radioactive waste products such as handling equipment, containment barriers, spent fuel, etc., etc.) - energy produced per mass unit is fantastically high Cons: - it's not currently economical -- current technology requires more energy to make the fusion than it gets out - it's not currently practical -- current technology cannot sustain a reaction or a succession of reactions that would be necessary to put this to use - it's not currently accepted widely -- nuclear energy (fission or fusion) is not widely accepted by civilians as a "good" way to create energy, and fusion will have similar hurdles to overcome as fission has It is relatively accepted among technical folks that fusion is the energy method of the future, as it has tremendous possibilities, but those possibilities probably won't be realized in any of our lifetimes.
Pros.Biogas is a reliable fuel, which is produced out of renewable resources, other industrial side products or even waste.Compared to other renewable energy sources like wind or solar energy biogas can be produced regardless of weather or daytime factors. The biological process of a biogas plant proceeds uninterrupted; 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.Since it is a fuel source it can be stored for future use.Carbon Neutral source of energy - While combustion of biogas, like natural gas, produces carbon dioxide (CO2) , a greenhouse gas, the carbon in biogas comes from plant matter that fixed this carbon from atmospheric CO2. Thus, biogas production is carbon-neutral and does not add to greenhouse gas emissions.Upgraded Bio- CNG has low CO2 emissions, 20% lesser than other conventional (may not be relevant as I have mentioned carbon neutral).Can be produced from a variety of organic feed stock.Biogas as such has a moderate energy content but Upgraded and liquefied Bio-Methane has very high energy content.Existing technology is highly efficient and can reliable.The anaerobic digestion process which produces Biogas produces also a NPK rich fertilizer which can be used in farms.Cons.Contains Impurities: Biogas contains a number of impurities. A scrubbing process has to be employed to remove these impurities.Small scale storage and bottling is difficult, since Biogas is essentially methane which is very difficult to compress and liquefy.Maintaining Process Parameter is at times difficult.