Debate, Nuclear Energy | Nuclear energy in the energy mix

Debate, Nuclear Energy |  Nuclear energy in the energy mix

Discussion post This is an entry for the discussion, written by an external contributor. The publication expresses the opinions of the author.

On Thursday August 17, Fredrikstad Bled reported that Burg’s new business park – Vickenpark – could only begin the first phase of construction on the 200-acre site. Other construction phases will have to wait until 2040 due to insufficient capacity available for electric power.

Same problem applies We also have a say when it comes to the ├śra region. In other words, the energy deficit is on its way to choke off business development in Lower Gloma. This challenge likely applies to many other places in the country as well.

The government is working on a large-scale investment in renewable energy using offshore wind turbines. This has been met with opposition from the fishing sector as it is believed that such infrastructure will stand in the way of fishing in such areas. On land, wind turbines have come into conflict with the reindeer herding industry and the desire to protect the landscape from major encroachment.

So it seems that investing in wind turbines, whether at sea or on land, is becoming increasingly unpopular. Moreover, wind turbines only produce power when the wind is strong. And how do you deal with waste (eg wings) when the mills have been running for 20 years?

Water power It is a great source of renewable energy. The problem is that most of the unprotected waterways are already developed. Of course, the renovation of water turbines can contribute somewhat, but not enough to solve the problem of the coming energy deficit.

See also  Tek indicator drops sharply | finansavisin

Then we have solar energy using solar panels. These produce good electricity when the sun is shining. We live in a country where we use more electricity in the dark season than we do in the summer when the sun is shining. But solar energy should in any case be part of the energy mix as well as the most stable and predictable energy supply. So how can we solve future energy needs?

We believe that a rethink should now be made with respect to nuclear energy. This is a non-polluting way to produce electrical energy. Research funding must be made available as quickly as possible to develop expertise in so-called “small modular reactors”. Modern nuclear power plants are very different from the ones that exploded at Chernobyl in 1986.

They can be built in areas that do not challenge conservation interests, such as old industrial sites. Space requirements can be limited eg. 400 goals. Small modular reactors can produce up to 300 megawatts. If four reactors are built at this power station, it will be able to supply 600,000 households with clean energy. Hence the business community surrounding this power station can also enjoy the power “at a short distance”.

What about the waste problem? Someone will ask. Good procedures have been incorporated here: spent fuel is cooled and placed in a buffer for 30-40 years to reduce radioactivity. During that period, 99.9% of the radioactivity disappears.

The waste is then stored in capsules 400-500 meters underground. The capsules are sealed with bentonite. The other alternative is to bury the waste in wells with a depth of between 1,000 and 4,000 metres. Therefore, we believe that the main argument against the development of nuclear energy no longer exists.

See also  How to get rid of annoying alerts in the browser - guide

And if we want to be able to meet the energy needs of the future with clean and predictable energy, we must also use nuclear energy in this country. This will come next in addition to water, wind and solar energy.

Hanisi Anenih

Hanisi Anenih

"Web specialist. Lifelong zombie maven. Coffee ninja. Hipster-friendly analyst."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *