Geothermal, wind and hydro types of power generations are green but the amount of energy produced from these methods are not enough for the amount of energy demand in Malaysia and adding to it these types of energy generations are not suitable for Malaysian environmental conditions. We don't have constant high speed winds in our country to rely on wind turbines. One of our country's main source of energy is hydro but for the production of hydro energy, really big hydro dams has to be built and this requires a big land coverage and in the process of building this dam our mother nature would be harmed.
One of the best solution for this problems are solar power generation. It has been said that a solar panel could only produce up to 3 kW/h which could be used for a household usage per day. The problem with solar power is also that it is limited whereby it is dependent on the duration of the sun available in the sky which is about 7-8 hours in Malaysia and it is mostly cloudy in Malaysia which would reduce the sun ray intensity and makes it not so suitable for Malaysians use.
So the next best thing that is available is the Nuclear Energy. Nuclear energy is a reliable energy source where the reactor wouldn't be turned off unless if there is any safety issues in the reactor. Besides that, the amount of green house emissions are greatly lesser than our conventional methods of power generation. The natural gas accounts to 60% of power generation in our nation , coal accounts for 24 % while hydro and biomass accounts for most of the remaining power generation in Malaysia.The amount of green house gas emission from these power generation method have lead to global warming. For a nuclear reactor, the carbon emission during operation is very much lower compared to our coal power plant. The capital cost for a reactor is twice the amount for the coal fired plant (http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Resource-Wars/2009/07/22/Malaysia-aims-for-nuclear-energy-by-2025/UPI-29381248299408/) . The cost is said that it could run up to RM 20 billion according to Prof Noramly who is the chairman of Malaysian Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) in an interview the Malay Mail (http://www.mmail.com.my/content/38629-malaysia-ready-nuclear-energy-says-aelb). From the figures below we could see that the coal plant would produce more green house emission compared to the nuclear reactor. The common misconception in people around the world is that the gas from a nuclear reactor is something radioactive and dangerous to health and nature but it is just merely some steam that is released after the cooling down process in the reactor. From figure 3 we could see that the total amount of carbon emission in nuclear reactor to be very small.
 |
| Fig 2: Coal fired plant gas emission |
 |
| Fig 3: Nuclear power plant emission |
 |
| Fig 3: Carbon emission for a nuclear reactor |
Great. Shorten your post, please.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs stated, safety in nuclear energy reactors are good because of a simple fact that reactors generating nuclear power will be shut down when complications occur in the reactors safety regions. But, history states otherwise. For example, the recent outburst in Chernobyl in which a reactor explosion was unable to be avoided. If a country Ukraine, vastly superior in technology was unable to prevent the incident, what are the chances of a minor Malaysia to be able to prevent the repetition of that incident when our country eventually has reactors? My opinion is that for a country like Malaysia to be able to generate nuclear energy, a lot of changes and advancement have to be done first.
ReplyDeleteRoshen James a/l Jaya Krishnan
me084283
james_thierry@hotmail.com
I would have to disagree with roshen. the Chernobly disaster was indeed an accident, and we are suppose to learn from mistakes or accidents, not to use them to put a fullstop on our development.Do we actualy think coal fired plants are actualy safer then nuclear power plant?? according to the article above NO.
ReplyDeleteMother Nature is depriving slowly due the emission of toxis waste thus killing us at a slow rate.
but i do agree on roshen that in order for a country like Malaysia to be able to generate nuclear energy, a lot of changes and advancement have to be done first.
R.Tevan Nair (ME083630)
dr.spiceinlife@yahoo.com
Fuel + Oxygen -> Heat + Carbon +Water
ReplyDeleteOur dream is to get a clean source of energy, but for a simple equatione as above Co2 doen't allow it.
So what is if we can have a source of energy has a a samll % of co2 or with no % at all !
The general director of TRED (Transport and Energy department) says that there are 3 ways to have this kind of source:
1.renewable energy where she means if a member reduces reliance on nuclear energy by 5% while increasing renewable energy use by 5%, "the actual [CO2] equation will be zero.
2.CCS (carbon capture and storage) still Waiting !
3.Nuclear.
Since No 1 debends on normal member & no 2 is not ready! Nuclear is our choise for grean energy ...
Anan Issam Alnajjar - Ce084206
annanalnajjar@hotmail.com
From an environmental perspective, nuclear energy can't be beaten. No belching smokestacks or polluting gases. It releases nothing into the atmosphere - no carbon dioxide, no sulfur, no mercury.
ReplyDeleteIt also takes up hardly any land. One double-reactor plant takes up a few hundred acres and can power 2 million homes. The same production from wind or solar can take tens of thousands of acres, often blighting scenic views.
What about waste?
With modern techniques, spent nuclear fuel is safely removed and reprocessed to yield new reactor fuel, drastically reducing the amount of waste needing disposal. In fact, if you used nuclear power for your entire lifetime needs, the resulting waste would only be enough fill a Coke can. And this can be safely deposited in deep repositories. Compare that with the tons of plastic, batteries, tires and motor oil we´ll throw out to be buried in landfills.
MUHAMMAD SADIQ BIN ANIPAH
ME083602
realphatslim@yahoo.com
Hi,
ReplyDeletein your article you are saying that we don't have much wind to use wind energy option.but wind energy can be use on the seaside due to its continuous wind. and water and sea water is not a problem anymore because today wind turbine can be use even on the sea. Besides if we afraid of multi-direction wind, we can solve it with vertical wind turbine. And nowd ays they are coming to hybrid wind turbine that can generates electricity from wind and solar at the same time. (MD NAZRIN BIN MD NAZIR, nazrinnazir.90@gmail.com)
Hi... we are the author of this blog.... Sorry for the delay in answering your questions. James, the Chernobyl accident occurred on the year 1986. Since then a lot of developments on the safety has been done. The reactor in Ukraine was their own technology and they were running some test on it and the accident occurred. At that time they didn't have enough layer of safety as in no containment vessel which are very common in current power plants... If Malaysia is going to construct nuclear power plant, it is not going to be our own technology, it will be from other nations that has build and operated the power plant without any problem for many years. A neutron radiation could be stopped with a block of concrete. The containment building is made of a 1 meter thick concrete wall and there are mixtures of steel and other material to give it more strength to withstand any possible terrorist threat like plane crashes. Adding to it, construction of a power plant is not gonna happen in 1 day... It takes 15 years and with the latest technology it could be reduced to 8 years. Before the operation of the plant, many safety test would also be conducted and training for the staffs would be given. All these things are done to ensure the safe operation of the power plant. Malaysia is capable of having its own power plant, so lets works towards getting one..
ReplyDeleteWell said Tevan, Anan and Sadiq. Md Nazrin, refer to this page first. (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-power4.htm)
ReplyDeleteAccording to that page, we need a 80 m diameter rotor to produce 2500 kw. Between the turbines itself a large space is required and for the wind turbine to work at its optimum level, a wind speed of 33 mph is needed and anything above that is considered dangerous for the structure and the turbine would be shut down. So there is a need for a constant 33 mph speed wind to get the rated power output of 2500 kw. Since we are located in the equator, the wind flow is very low and its not constant. Comparing this with a nuclear reactor which can produce 1000 Mw, we need 400 wind turbines to produce the same amount of power and the space required is huge. At the same time we are not saying we don't use wind turbines at all, but it is not enough to supply our base demand. So use them together with nuclear to produce enough amount of power for the benefit of the country...
Good read! thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteSolar Pv Installer
Solar Las Vegas