Gone Fission

The science behind nuclear power was first developed in the late 1800s. During WWII the focus of scientists in the field was to create and develop the atomic bomb. However, since that time, focus has been on the development of nuclear power as a source of electricity generation (World Nuclear Association 2013). Due to climate change, nuclear energy has been the subject of much debate over the last decade or so. The period has even been described as the ‘Nuclear Renaissance’ (Marshall 2005).

Figure 1 - Map of UK Nuclear Sites

Nuclear power has been subject to much criticism throughout its history, in no small part due to disasters such as Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011. Disasters such as these have led to widespread scepticism and have hindered the development of nuclear power in many countries, including our own. The UK has fallen behind other countries such as France in terms of nuclear power production. The two countries have very similar populations but in 2012, France produced 405 billion kilowatt hours of nuclear energy compared to the UK’s 64 (NEI 2013). Figure 1 (UK Government 2013) is a map showing the UK’s nuclear sites. The new build site at Hinkley Point C has been criticised in the news recently as some believe the power generated will be too expensive (BBC 2013).

Aside from the fact that nuclear power stations have been the (very) occasional cause of meltdown disasters, nuclear power is relatively environmentally friendly compared to coal, oil and gas powered stations. Figure 2 (UK Government 2006) shows the CO₂ emissions per kilowatt hours for several energy sources. Notice that the carbon footprint of nuclear is negligible when compared with those of coal and gas and is as small as hydro power and wind power. Due to the nature of nuclear fuels such as uranium, disposal of waste fuel can be a tricky business. I won’t get into this in huge detail here but I have included a link at the bottom of the page in case anyone is interested on how this is done.

Figure 2 - Bar chart showing relative carbon footprints of several fuel sources

I believe that nuclear power will need to play a substantial role in the future production of the UK’s energy. I could well see nuclear energy acting as a like for like replacement for coal, oil and gas fuelled plants as it boasts a constant supply of energy. I feel that potential hazards such as waste disposal can be avoided by appropriate management. The threat of a nuclear disaster will however, remain lodged in many people’s minds. Nuclear energy is an asset that we need to take advantage of but do so with extreme caution. The development of new fuels (see Thorium post) and techniques such as fusion may well hold the key to unlocking the full potential of nuclear power.

The link to waste disposal info is here,

Thanks for reading. 

Hey guys,

I found this article on the BBC about a potential new energy source involving hydrogen. The process of extraction mimics one that happens in nature and requires doesn't require as high temperatures as current methods of hydrogen extraction. Another major benefit over current methods is that this new process doesn't require the use of any fossil fuel. Could this be the shot in the arm that hydrogen power needs?

The link to the article is here

Thanks for reading.

Hi everyone, 

Just in case you weren't feeling in the Christmas spirit, here's a cartoon to get you in the festive mood.

Happy Holidays.

Shedding Light on Solar Power

Solar energy has been in the news recently as last week our government announced plans to cut funding for onshore wind energy and solar power. (Landale 2013). Figure 1 (DECC) shows us that solar energy has been on the rise in recent years.

Figure 1- Graph showing the growth in renewable electricity generation since 1990

However, compared to wind energy, the growth of solar power has been relatively small. In 2012, solar energy contributed 11% of renewables production capabilities. Onshore and offshore on the other hand, boasted 57% between them (DECC). Why is this?

Figures 2 (Solar Gis 2013) and 3 (Solar Gis 2013) show the amount of annual irradiation in the UK and Spain respectively.^th windiest region in Europe by a Met Office Wind Review. 

Figure 2 - Map of irradiance in the UK

Figure 3 - Map of irradiance in Spain

As you can see from the maps, the amount of irradiation is much lower in the UK than it is in countries of lower latitudes such as Spain. This results in a lower potential for solar power production. On the other hand, the UK has been ranked as the 4th windiest region in Europe by a Met Office Wind Review. Figures 4 (Met Office 2013) and 5 (Met Office 2013) display the monthly average wind speed for a site in England and a site in Spain respectively. The wind speed in the UK site ranges between 6 to 8 m/s as where the Spanish site stays around 5 m/s (Met Office 2013). It is clear that our country’s climate dictates which renewable source we invest in. It would therefore seem that the UK’s heavy investment in wind energy is grounded in logic and we should continue as such.

Figure 4 - Monthly average wind speed in a UK site

Figure 5 - Monthly average wind speed in a Spain site

What is the Future of British Solar Power?

I believe the future of British solar power will be the use of personal solar power devices. The government offers a ‘feed-in tariff’ in order to promote this. This allows people that have renewable systems installed to power their home will receive money from the government for every kilowatt hour of energy they produce. Producers are also able to sell any excess energy that they produce back to the power grid (UKGovernment 2013).  Due to the fact that our country receives a saddening amount of sun, I believe that on a large scale, we should continue to develop wind power more than solar power. However, I do still feel that solar energy has a role to play in the energy mix.

I’ve included a link to the government’s solar energy cashback calculator here in the event that anyone wants to know how much they could make. Thanks for reading and comments are welcome.