Skip to main content

View Diary: The Irrational Fear of Nukes - A German Perspective (262 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't consider nirs credible (0+ / 0-)

    I'll look into the topic later..

    •  Here's a link to a FERC ruling (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mamamedusa, kafkananda

      which appears to determine that "negawatts" can demand the same market prices as megawatts of generated electricity.  

      http://www.ferc.gov/...

      So, FERC is clearly interested.

      And, as to NIRS, I guess we will have to disagree, as I find them much more credible than industry-sponsored groups.

      •  Lovins is pushing this idea of distributed (0+ / 0-)

        micropower. I just don't understand why it's a good idea. It's not more efficient than larger plants at generating electricity, and it doesn't solve the issue of intermittent renewables (it exacerbates the problem.) His idea appears to be that if you couple micropower and cogeneration (e.g. a thermal power source -- he tries to hide it, but he is implying a natural gas turbine) it makes more sense than a grid, because you get process heating. This isn't new, a few places use district heating with waste heat from their power plants, but I think the applications are extremely limited (otherwise it would already be routine.)

        But the writing in the article you linked is just terrible, so maybe I just don't understand what he's trying to say. No sources, either, just assertions.

        (Note: I didn't say anything about conservation. Efficiency is by definition good! It has nothing to do with what source you're using to generate power. But efficiency isn't going to replace the coal power plants in China.)

        •  In some ways, I'd like to see a "pure" market, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Earth Ling

          without any subsidies, in the energy realm.  I do NOT pretend to know what that would favor, but it would be interesting to see fossil fuels and nuclear power and solar and wind and "negawatts" competing head-to-head.  Of course, a "pure" market might not be suited to factor in externalities, but...

          I think Lovins also pushes the micropower concept because he leans libertarian in some ways, and favors decentralization in general.  I've seen it argued that the localization of power generation facilitates greater local economic development, as well.  I like the idea of technological diversity in generating energy, and I think the micropower concept would facilitate such diversity.  I would also be interested to find out whether micropower would provide a security benefit through the decentralization of power generation sources.

          •  I generally lean libertarian as well (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mamamedusa, citisven

            I also happen to live near the coast in an area prone to Hurricanes and flooding. Ground zero for climate change in the USA! So I have a particular interest in pricing the external cost of CO2 into the coal and natural gas plants that generate 80% of the electricity that flows into my house (even though I use a "100% wind" plan, that's the wholesale market...) But it's not something that is possible in a free market, because the majority of the costs fall on people outside of the market (see how much success people in South America have suing our oil companies for environmental damage.) The Government will have to set a price, and that means they are picking the winners and the losers in the market. It may be justified, but it means there is lots of ink spilled arguing about it.

            Anyway, I have to head out for the night. It was nice talking to you.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site