Has the current energy crisis, including rising fossil fuel and energy prices, increased the scale of public acceptance for building a nuclear power plant?
Nuclear power can be an important element in increasing the diversification of energy sources when other types of energy sources have been developed in the country. Among these other sources of energy types, many countries have traditional, dirty, emission-intensive fossil fuel-based energy sources and various types of environmentally and climatically clean renewable and emission-free energy sources developed mainly in recent years. Emission-free energy sources based on cold fusion and hydrogen power will be developed in the future. This is particularly important in view of the developing climate crisis generated by increasing civilisational greenhouse gas emissions and the accelerating process of global warming. In order to slow down the progressive process of global warming, it is necessary to carry out a full pro-climate transformation of the energy sector through the development of renewable and emission-free energy sources within the next few to a maximum of a dozen years. An alternative transition technology to achieve a fully carbon-free economy, including a carbon-free power sector, could be nuclear power. Nuclear power plants under construction today are much safer than those built a few decades ago. The use of modern technologies makes it possible to ensure a very high level of safety in the operation of nuclear power plants regardless of the action of various external factors, including, for example, the fall of a large aircraft on the power plant or ballistic missiles. In addition, it has been estimated that, given current fossil fuel prices, nuclear power could be several times cheaper than coal power. Research institutes analysing nuclear safety issues have estimated that the probability of an accident in a modern nuclear power plant is 1:40 million. By comparison, the probability of a person being struck by lightning is estimated at 1:300,000. Consequently, the scale of public acceptance for the construction of a nuclear power plant is increasing. This change is influenced by the above-mentioned issues of improving the safety of nuclear power operations and the current energy crisis.
And what does this issue look like in your country?
What are the key factors in changing the level of public acceptance for the construction of a nuclear power plant?
What is the role of the media and governmental socio-marketing campaigns in changing the general public awareness of the issue?
Has the current energy crisis, including rising fossil fuel and energy prices, increased the scale of public acceptance for the construction of a nuclear power plant?
What is your opinion on this topic?
What do you think about this subject?
Please respond,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Nuclear power plants should be part of the energy mix for energy security reasons if nothing else. Nuclear power plants with fail safe security measures will be the way forward. Also working with radioactive materials with lower radiation levels should be seriously considered. Carbon footprint would be lower than from coal and fossil fuels, and we should work to drive these figures lower. Engineers have the knowhow to accomplish this.
For the IEA in its report entitled "World Energy Mix," three general factors determine global energy geopolitics: (i) the world demand for energy will increase considerably over the next few decades; (ii) the proportion of fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and renewable energies will change slowly in the energy matrix, and (iii) the regions with the highest energy consumption will have a growing demand for energy outside their borders.
In the long term, several fundamental energy trends persist: the population increases its energy needs; emerging economies increasingly resolve the dynamics of the energy-market relationship; fossil fuels supply most of the world's energy needs, and universal access to energy for the worlds poor would continue to be a pending goal.
As projected by the IEA, global energy demand is expected to increase by 35% between 2010 and 2035. Fossil fuels would account for 59% of the global increase in demand, remaining the main sources of energy worldwide. Renewable energies are the ones that would have the highest annual growth rate at 7.7%, together with hydroelectric energy at 2%.
Oil would continue to be the most important fuel in the world energy matrix, but its share would drop from around 32% in 2011 to 27% in 2035. World demand would reach 94.2 million barrels per day (Mb/ d) in 2020 and 99.7 Mb/d in 2035, compared to 87.4 Mb/d in 2011.
Although the share of coal in global energy demand would fall by almost three percentage points (to less than 25% in 2035), this fuel would still be the second most important fuel after oil and the backbone of electricity generation.
An increase in gas demand is projected from 3.3 trillion cubic meters in 2010 to 5 trillion cubic meters in 2035, an increase of almost 50%. Its share in the global energy matrix would rise from 22% in 2010 to 24% in 2035, almost reaching the share of coal.
In 2035, the share of renewable energy (including traditional biomass) in global energy demand would reach 18%, compared to 13% in 2010. Most of the growth would occur in the electricity sector.
It is projected that in 2035 nuclear energy will supply 12% of the world's electricity, a percentage quite close to the current level.
Electricity generation represented 38% of world energy consumption in 2010, being the most important element of demand. As projected by the IEA, this percentage would rise to 42% in 2035.
The construction sector uses energy for heating, cooling, lighting, and electrical appliances and is currently the largest consumer. Demand in this sector is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 1% through 2035, an overall increase of 29% since 2010. Energy demand in the industrial sector would grow faster than in any other sector, despite the continuous increases in energy efficiency and an eventual slowdown in industrial production growth. According to the IEA, the global endowment of energy resources would be more than enough to meet the projected energy demand for 2035.
The global electricity demand is expected to grow faster than any other final form of energy. As projected by the IEA, demand would increase by more than 70% between 2010 and 2035, an average of 2.2% per year.
According to the IEA, electricity generation from renewable energies would almost triple in 2010-2035, reaching 31% of total generation.
Quote: "The global electricity demand is expected to grow faster than any other final form of energy. As projected by the IEA, demand would increase by more than 70% between 2010 and 2035, an average of 2.2% per year.
According to the IEA, electricity generation from renewable energies would almost triple in 2010-2035, reaching 31% of total generation.'
That renewables would account for 31% of electricity supply in 2010 to 2035 is wishful thinking.
Since Putin's aggressive attacks, the 70% ration shown /talked above about, has changed by large.
Regards
Fatema Miah
Yes, so because of the energy crisis, some better solutions for fission energy started to come out of paper and drawers to become a reality, what is making fission energy safer and therefore more favorable.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology