Alternative Energy: Wind Energy, Nuclear Energy & Hydro Power
In the fight against global climate change, it is imperative that we quickly reduce the amount of green house gases we emit. Most of our electricity is generated through the combustion of fossil fuels, which creates carbon dioxide, as well as sulfur and nitrogen oxides. It has become obvious that human activities are putting increasing amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. The quickest way to reduce these emissions would be to cut back on our consumption of energy they use. Another way to reduce our emissions is to develop and use sources of energy that have fewer or no carbon emissions. The following section gives a brief overview of possible technologies that could, if in widespread use, help us reach our desired reduction of green house gas emissions.
Wind Energy
Wind contains kinetic energy, or energy of motion, that humans can harness. Wind energy is considered a "clean" or "green" source of energy because, during operation, wind turbines do not emit any green house gases. Wind turbines are modern day windmills. Wind passes through the blades of the windmill causing them to rotate. The blades are connected to a long pole which begins to spin, under power from the blades. The pole in turn, spins a turbine which generates energy. Energy is generated without the combustion of any fossil fuels. Thus, wind energy does not emit carbon dioxide, sulfur or nitrogen oxides, or hazardous materials. Wind energy has other benefits, other than reducing our green house gas emissions. Because wind turbines do not use fuel as an input, they can help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Also, wind energy prices do not fluctuate as oil prices change, making wind energy more stable. Wind turbines can be installed relatively quickly once a site has been chosen, which is important in our effort to reduce emissions by specific dates.
Wind provides a viable source of clean, renewable energy for the United States. According to the US EPA, every mega-watt of wind energy generated offsets 1,000 - 2,000 pounds of carbon dioxide. However, only 3-5 billion kilo-watts are generated each year in the US, enough to fulfill the energy needs for a year of about 1 million people. For wind energy to become a real solution, it needs to be in widespread use.
While wind energy seems like a gift horse in terms of emissions, there are some drawbacks to wind turbines. There is much debate over the aesthetics of the wind mills themselves. Unlike coal-fire power plants or nuclear reactors, you have to put wind turbines where the wind is. This can mean having a wind farm near a community, or, as in Copenhagen Denmark, right off the coast of a major city. Supporters of wind power feel that wind mills are beautiful and harkens back to the allure Don Quixote felt. Others, however, feel that the turbines are an eye sore and ruin the visual landscape. There is also a concern about the environmental impact of wind turbines. Scientists have been debating whether or not wind turbines pose problems for migratory birds. Some say there is no substantial evidence that areas with wind turbines see more bird death, while others argue the opposite. Until this debate is settled once and for all, communities that wish to build wind turbines will have to consider the possible impact on birds.
The first wind farm in the Garden State came online in December 2005. The Jersey-Atlantic Wind Farm is located in Atlantic County, New Jersey and currently produces approximately 19 million kilo-watt hours of energy a year. This is an excellent first step towards reducing New Jersey's carbon foot print.
Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy is created using the physical properties of atomic materials. Atoms are the basic unit of matter, and have very distinct structures. Each element has a specific number of protons and electrons, which define the element. Atoms also are made up of neutrons, and the number of neutrons found in the atom's nucleus determines the isotope. Isotopes are just different variations of the same element. Sometimes, an atom becomes unbalanced, and contains too much internal energy. When this happens the atom is considered "radioactive" because the atom will emit energy in an attempt to restore order. Uranium-235 and Plutonium are the most commonly known radioactive elements.
There are two ways to create nuclear power, nuclear fusion and nuclear fission. Nuclear fusion is the process by which two smaller atoms are accelerated at high speeds, and crashed together. The force of impact fuses the two nuclei together, creates a larger, new, atom and releases energy. However, fusion power is currently not a viable option. It takes more energy to accelerate the atoms together than they produce upon impact. There is also no method currently in place to harness and utilize this energy. Nuclear fission, however, has been developed into a viable energy source. Nuclear fission is when a large atom is broken apart and releases energy. The energy in this process comes from the bonds that hold the protons and neutrons together in the nucleus. In a typical nuclear energy power plant the energy released from the fission of Uranium-235 is used to heat water into steam. The steam then turns a turbine and generates electric power.
Nuclear energy is not "clean" energy or "green" energy in the full sense of the words. Nuclear power emits not green house gases. From a global climate change stand-point, nuclear energy is one option for zero emission electricity generation. However, nuclear energy poses different environmental and human health problems. The particles and atoms created during fusion are typically still radio-active. The water used to drive the turbines often picks up some radio-active material and cannot be simply pumped back into the water table. As a Country we have not et addressed how we wish to dispose of spent fuel rods and other contaminated products of nuclear power plants. As we look to reduce our carbon emissions we must face the other potential environmental problems we might create. This is not to say we should not use nuclear energy, but we desperately need to decide as a Country how we wish to safely deal with our current nuclear waste, as well as what will be generated in the future. There is no point in solving global climate change, if we have to face a fight against radioactive contamination of water tables or soil.
New Jersey has three operational nuclear power plant, Hope Creek, Oyster Creek and Salem as of 2005. While three plants might not sound like a lot, nuclear power provides 50% of the State's electricity, according to the United States Department of Energy. The Oyster Creek power plant is the Nation's oldest operational nuclear power plant. But what does all this mean for the State, in terms of global climate change? Like all things, nuclear power plants need maintenance and repair, and eventually will need to be taken off line. The State Legislature has written into law mandates that the State reduce its carbon emissions. With 50% of our power already coming from a clean source, adding nuclear power plants may not be the best solution. What we will need to be sure of is that when the Oyster Creek power plant is retired it is replaced with another zero emission power source.
Hydro Power
Water contains kinetic energy, the energy of motion, the same way wind does. Hydro power is a means of harnessing this energy and turning it into electricity. Water can also contain another kind of energy, potential energy. Potential energy can belong to any object with mass that is contained within an area with force. In other words, potential energy is the energy possessed by an object in one physical position in relation to another. Dams are a way of storing large amounts of potential energy. When water backs up behind the dam, it is at a much greater height then the bottom where the turbines are located. As the water falls, it releases this potential energy. The tidal action of waves is another way to harness energy from water.
Hydro-power has been an important way to generate power in the United States. However, we have built large dam projects on almost every available stretch of river. Yet, it is possible to build smaller, local water works that could serve as a way to reduce our carbon emissions Hydro power releases little to no carbon emissions, so it is a "clean" source of energy. Water power is also versatile, which gives it more benefits over traditional power plants. Hydro-electric plants can absorb fluctuations in demand better than coal fire power plants. In times of peak demand, more water can be released from the reservoir. In times of diminished demand, excess electricity can be ised to pump water up into the reservoir, thus, "saving" that energy for later use. Hydro-power can also be used in small scale projects in a way that coal cannot be. Turbines can be placed anywhere there is moving water. Thus individual homes or communities can set up there own electricity generation. Think back to when waterwheels were prevalent.
Hydro-power can leave a mark on the environment. There is a concern that breaking up waterways with large dams can damage the existing ecosystems and the plants and animals that live there. While steps have been developed to circumvent this, it is never good for the environment to segment an ecosystem. Another problem with planning on using hydro-power to offset our carbon emissions is that there are few places to build new waterworks. If New Jersey is going to get serious about hydro-power it will most likely have to focus on smaller, local projects. While New Jersey has some hydro-power, it is minimal compared to nuclear or coal power.