Great timing for Nuclear Vs.Renewable Energy discussion!

Nuclear versus Renewable Energy

Nuclear Energy is often looked to for being a good alternative to fossil fuels.

I think it’s possible that even with meltdowns in ALL of Japan’s reactors the resulting devastation might not be as bad as what we have done with coal. The effects of coal are much more sublime and worthy of discussion later, like after the next coal ash spill…

Depending on the source, Nuclear and Renewable energy are pretty close to each other in terms of percent used:  Petro: 40% Coal 23% Gas 23% Nuclear 8.4% Renewables 7.3%  Hydroelectric, the most subsidized renewable, makes up the most by far.

With our current course away from fossil fuels we shouldn’t let Nuclear increase in share. Nuclear Energy has been subsidized for a very long time. Its current position as a big producer of energy is in large part to that. If any energy should be subsidized it’s renewable.

It will be interesting to see society’s reaction to yet another nuclear accident.

Why should tax payers go along with something that causes such serious repercussions and vulnerability?

The reactors were not made by some corrupt, crumbling society like the soviets at Chernobyl. The Japanese are perhaps the most technologically advanced economy in the world with an extensive natural disaster prevention mentality.

The reactors were made by the American company GE.  We have many nuclear reactors over fault zones all over the U.S.  It might take only one serious accident to make it seem not worth it.

If it can happen from natural disaster that we prepare for, all the easier for disasters from man. Could there be a more vulnerable target for terrorists? Are there enough fail safes in place to prevent Murphy’s law?

When the end result is as horrifying as the 4 to 90 thousand deaths from cancer linked to Chernobyl fallout it is certainly worth a hard look. I recently searched radiation poisoning pictures and almost lost my breakfast earlier. Nuclear material is capable of very evil things.

After the catastrophic meltdown disaster risk, the waste issue has to be the biggest problem. We are transporting it all over our highways and storing it in unsafe facilities and geologic areas. Dont have any figures on amounts produced but it must be immense.

A major issue in comparing nuclear and renewable is transmission. Nuclear faces the same problem as coal and gas plants in that up to ¾ of the energy is lost in transport. Basically meaning ¾ times the amount of pollution and hidden costs had to be created just to get it there. Most renewables can be generated right where they are needed and have the fewest hidden costs.

Wind is a renewable but has the transmission problem. Winds biggest problem however is the “not in my back yard” mentality.

I would prefer having extensive ridge top and power line development in preference to even the fear of having a Chernobyl like incident in my back yard. I would even put up with the annoying flashing lights at night. I invite people to research what happened at Chernobyl. It’s really scary.  

Whatever government subsidies are going to fossil and nuclear energy, need to be redirected to renewables. I see the laws in North Carolina that restrict developing ridge tops for wind energy as a form of subsidy for fossil and nuclear.

Misinformation

I am amazed by an article I just read in Builder magazine and not in a good way. Builder magazine is probably one of the most read periodicals by the production builder field in the country. These are people responsible for a majority of our new housing.  Lets hope the decision makers are not influenced too much by what they read in one of the magazine's featured articles called Build Smart!

The mag has some great information in it. Mainly economic data.

It is insulting however, that in this age of enlightenment on Energy Efficiency, such a prominent magazine would be publishing such bad advice. I have seen questionable advice in this section before but this is ridiculous considering it could help continue our country's legacy of poorly insulated housing stock. 

In the Build Smart section under the How-To article they perpetuate a myth that has possibly plagued millions of houses in our society. The Fiberglass batt is the most common type of insulation in the country. Its bad installation accounts for untold amounts of pollution, excessive energy bills, and home owner discomfort.

The article says: "Be careful not to compress the batts, which can reduce their R-value."

While this is actually a true statement, it is wrong for what we are trying to do, which is insulate the house.

We want to insulate the stud cavity. The more fiberglass batt you stuff in a space, the better insulated it will be. The insulation might lose a small amount of R-value per inch but the overall effect is much better insulation.

The article should have said: "Use batts thicker and wider than the intended cavity to ensure the insulation is compressed and fills as much of the cavity as possible." Or something like that.

To be fair the article was titled "Flash and Batt" which looks at a new way of getting higher performance out of traditional forms of insulation. The article did not however, mention that the system could be used with blown cellulose, a great alternative to batts, Blown-in-blanket (BIB) fiberglass and Open cell foam options that were pictured and discussed.

Production builders are not going to start insulating better until the market (or govt) demands it. Bad information certainly does not help. If you are in the "market", demanding Airtight, Continuous Insulation is probably your best bet at reducing your energy bills and environmental footprint while giving you greater comfort and better control over Indoor Air Quality.

Starting a Blog

Greetings Blog world! Looking forward to sharing our experiences of Green Building in Asheville and WNC. This should be a great way of blogging with less clogging our website. Please check our Website SpringtimeHomes.com, Twitter, Face book pages and coming soon You Tube videos. Not everyone is in the position or mindset of building or remodeling but eventually you will be so its best to be as prepared as possible. The dwellings we choose to live in shape us in many ways. Their monetary costs can be painful and obvious but the hidden costs of our homes are only beginning to be realized. Journey with us as we explore the philosophy and methods of reducing our energy costs to lessen environmental impact while creating healthier indoor air and allowing Sunlight into our homes for a stronger awareness and connection to Nature.