A CASE STUDY IN VARIOUS RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES

Master of Engineering Graduate ProgramSilliman University

MEP 204 - RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES

A CASE STUDY IN VARIOUS RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES

Submitted to:JAYCHRIS Y. ONIA, RME, M. Eng'g.

Submitted by:DON C. OPADA, BSCoE

Table of Contents

Nuclear Energy vs Fossil Fuel ------------------------------------------------------------ 3

Nuclear Energy vs Geothermal Energy ------------------------------------------------ 10

Geothermal Energy vs Hydro Power ---------------------------------------------------- 16

Hydro Power vs Solar Energy ------------------------------------------------------------ 21

Solar Energy vs Biomass ------------------------------------------------------------------ 27

Biomass vs Geothermal -------------------------------------------------------------------- 33

2

NUCLEAR VS. FOSSIL FUELS

3

I. Introduction

Electricity is the most important material in the 21st century. Considering that most of our history spent on earth has been without it, it is extraordinary how it is now essential to human life and we would cease to work and maybe even exist if it was gone. It is the lifeline of all modern technology and can be found in every house in developed countries. Whole towns and cities depend largely on electricity to survive; restaurants, offices, street lights, public buildings, services.As global energy demand increased, along with a growing awareness of the need for sustainable development, Fossil Fuels are the most important energy sources in our world today. The overwhelming majority of the energy used in the world comes from the burning of three major fossil fuels: coal, petroleum, and natural gas.

a. Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy is a way of creating heat through the fission process of atoms. All power plants convert heat into electricity using steam. At nuclear power plants, the heat to make the steam is created when atoms split apart.

It also releases energy in the form of heat. The released neutrons can then repeat the process. This releases even more neutrons and more nuclear energy. The repeating of the process is called a chain reaction. In a nuclear power plant, uranium is the material used in the fission process.

The heat from fission boils water and creates steam to turn a turbine. As the turbine spins, the generator turns and its magnetic field produce electricity.

b. Fossil Fuels

Coal, oil and gas are called "fossil fuels" because they have been formed from the organic remains of prehistoric plants and animals.

All most all power plants convert heat into electricity using steam. It uses fossils to fuel the power plant, like nuclear energy that uses uranium as fuel.

4

II. The Problem:

1. Well it takes a lot of energy and resources to produce such a material. However some of those resources are running out or have become a problem for our current climate situation, so alternatives are needed desperately.

2. Our Earth is warming. Earth's average temperature has risen by 1.4°F over the past century, and is projected to rise another 2 to 11.5°F over the next hundred years. Small changes in the average temperature of the planet can translate to large and potentially dangerous shifts in climate and weather.Rising global temperatures have been accompanied by changes in weather and climate. Many places have seen changes in rainfall, resulting in more floods, droughts, or intense rain, as well as more frequent and severe heat waves. The planet's oceans and glaciers have also experienced some big changes - oceans are warming and becoming more acidic, ice caps are melting, and sea levels are rising. As these and other changes become more pronounced in the coming decades, they will likely present challenges to our society and our environment.Over the past century, human activities have released large amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The majority of greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuels to produce energy

III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

a. Total World Electricity Generation by Fuel (2009)

5

As seen in the diagram above. The highest percentage of electricity made in the world is by coal, a fossil fuel, at 41%. Second to coal is Gas at 20% where as Oil is 6% making the percentage of fossil fuels being used to produce energy at 67%.

Nuclear is fourth on the diagram just behind Hydro. Nuclear however is being recognized more and more as a very sustainable material. Nevertheless there is a lot of rising controversy, which we will discuss in the next few pages.

b. According to Worldometers the amount of days left with resources in 2013 are as follows: February 23, 2013

48,683,273 Oil pumped today (barrels) 1,251,071,871,324 Oil left (barrels) 14,894 Days to the end of oil 1,146,077,995,567 Gas left (boe) 60,320 Days to the end of gas 4,393,210,029,593 Coal left (boe) 151,490 Days to the end of coal

If the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has accurately estimated the planets economically accessible uranium resources, reactors could run more than 200 years at current rates of consumption.

Most of the 2.8 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity generated worldwide from nuclear power every year is produced in light-water reactors (LWRs) using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. About 10 metric tons of natural uranium goes into producing a metric ton of LEU, which can then be used to generate about 400 million kilowatt-hours of electricity, so present-day reactors require about 70,000 metric tons of natural uranium a year.

According to the NEA, identified uranium resources total 5.5 million metric tons, and an additional 10.5 million metric tons remain undiscovered—a roughly 230-year supply at today's consumption rate in total. Further exploration and improvements in extraction technology are likely to at least double this estimate over time.

Using more enrichment work could reduce the uranium needs of LWRs by as much as 30 percent per metric ton of LEU. And separating plutonium and uranium from

6

spent LEU and using them to make fresh fuel could reduce requirements by another 30 percent. Taking both steps would cut the uranium requirements of an LWR in half.

Two technologies could greatly extend the uranium supply itself. Neither is economical now, but both could be in the future if the price of uranium increases substantially. First, the extraction of uranium from seawater would make available 4.5 billion metric tons of uranium—a 60,000-year supply at present rates. Second, fuel-recycling fast-breeder reactors, which generate more fuel than they consume, would use less than 1 percent of the uranium needed for current LWRs. Breeder reactors could match today's nuclear output for 30,000 years using only the NEA-estimated supplies.

c. Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources.

7

IV. The Results:

Based on the studies reviewed, the following observations can be made:• Greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear power plants are among the lowest of

any electricity generation method and on a lifecycle basis are comparable to wind, hydro-electricity and biomass.

• With the amount of time left with resources, and with the current consumption rate, uranium can sustain us for as much as 60,000 years compare to Coal with is more or less 421 years.

V. Lessons learned:

When fossil fuels are burned, their carbon unites with oxygen in the air to produce energy, and CO2 is a by-product of this combustion. Other elements occurring with fossil fuels, most notably sulfur, are also combusted, releasing noxious emissions toxic to plants and animals. The extraction, processing, transportation, and waste disposal involved with fossil fuels also have environmental impacts. The two most important ecological impacts of combusting fossil fuels are the effects on climate of CO2 and the effects on health of gaseous and particulate matter released by combustion.

Coal is mined either by strip mining or by deep mining. Strip mining renders hundreds of acres of land unusable unless reclaimed and can lead to mudslides when the removed overburden is piled too high. Deep mining is prone to cave-ins and fires, and many miners eventually succumb to pneumoconiosis (black lung disease). Abandoned mines often leach acidic effluents into local streams, harming the local ecology and ruining

8

scenic vistas.

Drilling for oil leads to environmental degradation at the drill site, but even more problematic are water pollution caused by leaks during transportation and accidental oil spills. These accidents have been known to contaminate shorelines and estuaries, fouling beaches and killing water fowl and aquatic life. Natural gas extraction is also potentially dangerous to the environment, since it is prone to drilling accidents and pipeline leaks.

VI. CONCLUSIONS:

With the above supporting information, nuclear power is much preferred compare to fossils fuels, both with fuel availability and sustainability and its impact to the environment because of the greenhouse emission.

VII. APPENDICES:

http://www.unis.unvienna.org http://oliverpendle.hubpages.com http://www.worldcoal.org http://www.worldometers.info http://www.rff.org http://www.ieer.org http://www.scientificamerican.com http://www.epa.gov http://www.world-nuclear.org

9

http://www.world-nuclear.org/

http://www.epa.gov/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/

http://www.ieer.org/

http://www.rff.org/

http://www.worldometers.info/

http://www.worldcoal.org/

http://oliverpendle.hubpages.com/

http://www.unis.unvienna.org/

NUCLEAR VS. GEOTHERMAL

10

I. Introduction

The future of the human race largely depends on the advancement in efficient, clean, high out-put energy production. As a civilization we need not focus on what the past has held for energy production but rather what the present and future hold for us. Two key options are the long lasting, high out-put but environmentally hazardous option which is nuclear fission (nuclear power) and the safe but potential ground water contamination hazard which is geothermal energy. This paper will point out strictly fact based information on both forms of energy and which one shows the most potential as the dominate energy producer for the United States.

a. Nuclear Energy

Nuclear energy was first discovered by a French man named Henri Becquerel in 1896. “He found that photographic plates stored in the dark near uranium were blackened like X-ray plates, which had been just recently discovered at the time” (Our-Energy). Energy from a nuclear reactor is created when water is boiled from a uranium rod and the steam then turns a steam turbine or by pressurizing water.

“Nuclear power can come from the fission or uranium, plutonium or thorium or the fusion of hydrogen into helium. Today it is almost all uranium. The basic energy fact is that the fission of an atom of uranium produces 10 million times the energy produced by the combustion of an atom of carbon from coal” (Our-Energy).

Essentially nuclear energy is a conversion of mass into energy, Albert Einstein’s famous

11

equation best describes this event, E=mc2. This event occurs when the atom is split or the nucleus is forced into other nuclei of other atoms. The sun’s type of nuclear power is nuclear fusion; this event is occurs when hydrogen atoms fuse into helium atoms.Since the driving force for nuclear reactors is steam, there is virtually zero harmful pollutants put into Earth's atmosphere. “Nuclear power is the only industry which takes full responsibility for all its wastes, and costs this into the product

b. Geothermal Energy

Geothermal energy has been used for thousands of years in some countries for cooking and heating.

The name "geothermal" comes from two Greek words: "geo" means "Earth" and "thermal" means "heat".

Hot rocks underground heat water to produce steam. We drill holes down to the hot region, steam comes up, is purified and used to drive turbines, which drive electric generators.

II. The Problem

a. As the demand of energy rises, more power plants is constructed and it also means, more waste is produce which is harmful to the environment. So there’s a need to find an alternative sources of Energy with no or less waste.

b. The fuels that are used today in producing energy are depleting in a rapid rate and are harder to retrieve. The consequence is that we can be facing an energy crisis in the future is we are not careful today. The energy prices will sky rocket and not be available for many individuals or countries. To avoid this doom scenario we need to find alternatives and used them to their full potential.

III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

By mass, 99.9% of the Earth is hotter than 100C. That means that not far below our feet is the power to boil unlimited water and generate clean, renewable energy. Is the UK throwing all it can at this extraordinary opportunity? Of course not, who do you think we are? Germans?That contrasts strikingly with the more glamorous sister of deep geothermal energy, nuclear power. Both ultimately tap the heat generated by the decay of radioactive elements. Geothermal plants send water down holes to bring to the surface the heat from natural radioactive decay deep in the mantle. Nuclear power mines the

12

radionuclide’s, concentrates them, sends them critical and then wonders what to do with the leftover mess - not very elegant by comparison.

a. Nuclear Waste

Nuclear waste is produced in many different ways. There are wastes produced in the reactor core, wastes created as a result of radioactive contamination, and wastes produced as a byproduct of uranium mining, refining, and enrichment. The vast majority of radiation in nuclear waste is given off from spent fuel rods.

A typical reactor will generate 20 to 30 tons of high-level nuclear waste annually. There is no known way to safely dispose of this waste, which remains dangerously radioactive until it naturally decays.

The rate of decay of a radioactive isotope is called its half-life, the time in which half the initial amount of atoms present takes to decay. The half-life of Plutonium-239, one particularly lethal component of nuclear waste, is 24,000 years.

The hazardous life of a radioactive element (the length of time that must elapse before the material is considered safe) is at least 10 half-lives. Therefore, Plutonium-239 will remain hazardous for at least 240,000 years.

There was a proposal to dump nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, a site that is considered sacred by the Western Shoshone.

The plan was for Yucca Mountain to hold all of the high level nuclear waste ever produced from every nuclear power plant in the US. However, that would completely fill up the site and not account for future waste.

Transporting the wastes by truck and rail would be extremely dangerous.

Repository sites in Australia, Argentina, China, southern Africa, and Russia have also been considered.

Though some countries reprocess nuclear waste (in essence, preparing it to send through the cycle again to create more energy), this process is banned in the U.S. due to increased proliferation risks, as the reprocessed materials can also be used for making bombs. Reprocessing is also not a solution because it just creates additional nuclear waste.

There are a few different methods of waste immobilization. In the vitrification process, waste is combined with glass-forming materials and melted. Once the materials solidify, the waste is trapped inside and can't easily be released.

13

b. Geothermal Waste

Geothermal fluids contain elevated levels of arsenic, mercury, lithium and boron because of the underground contact between hot fluids and rocks. If waste is released into rivers or lakes instead of being injected into the geothermal field, these pollutants can damage aquatic life and make the water unsafe for drinking or irrigation.A serious environmental effect of the geothermal industry is arsenic pollution. Levels of arsenic in the Waikato River almost always exceed the World Health Organization standard for drinking water of 0.01 parts per million. Most of the arsenic comes from geothermal waste water discharged from the power station. Natural features such as hot springs are also a source of arsenic, but it tends to be removed from the water as colorful mineral precipitates like bright red realgar and yellowy green orpiment.

• Air emissionsGeothermal fluids contain dissolved gases which are released into the atmosphere. The main toxic gases are carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Both are denser than air and can collect in pits, depressions or confined spaces. These gases are a recognized hazard for people working at geothermal stations or bore fields, and can also be a problem in urban areas. In Rotorua a number of deaths have been attributed to hydrogen sulfide poisoning, often in motel rooms or hot-pool enclosures. Carbon dioxide is also a greenhouse gas, contributing to potential climate change. However, geothermal extraction releases far fewer greenhouse gases per unit of electricity generated than burning fossil fuels such as coal or gas to produce electricity.

IV. The results:

With the above information, the waste product of geothermal power plant is minimal compare to the waste produce by the Nuclear power plant. And it takes a long and expensive process to dispose the radioactive waste of the nuclear power plant.

Sustainable is another label used for renewable sources of energy. In other words, geothermal energy is a resource that can sustain its own consumption rate – Unlike conventional energy sources such as coal and fossil fuels. According to scientists, the energy in our geothermal reservoirs will literally last billions of years.

V. Lessons Learned

14

Renewable Energy has more advantages over other of conventional sources of Energy like the Nuclear Energy. The consumption of lithium has been increasing globally, and is predicted to triple by 2020 as lithium battery use increases, electric cars become more widespread, and as more batteries are used to store electricity produced by solar and wind sources. The traditional sources of lithium are soil and brine dried in salt ponds, especially in Chile and Bolivia, but the waste water produced at the geothermal power plant, which can be millions of gallons a day, is equally rich in lithium. Extracting the lithium from geothermal waste water is easier than extracting from brine, and less water-intensive than extracting from soil, and the process has a smaller environment footprint because the water has already been extracted to generate electricity. The hot waste water produced in the process is salty and rich in silicates and minerals such as lithium.

VI. Conclusion

In conclusion, today’s impractical and costly alternative power technology may well be tomorrow's energy mainstay. Scientists are exploring tons of alternative energy avenues, so cheap new alternative energy could be right around the corner. And renewable is much environmental friendly.

VII. APPENDICES

• http://www.nuclearpowerprocon.org• http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/issues/nuclear-energy-&-waste/nuclear-energy-fact-sheet.php• http://geoheat.oit.edu/bulletin/bull28-4/art4.pdf• http://texas.sierraclub.org/alamo/pdf/Nuke_v._geothermal_comparison.pdf• http://energyinformative.org• http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/geothermal-energy/page-5• http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2011/11/17/geothermal-waste-iphone-lithium-battery/

15

GEOTHERMAL VS. HYDROELECTRICITY

16

I. Introduction

Between 1970 and 1998, global energy use rose by about 70%, and demand for energy continues to rise at a rate of about 2% each year. While energy use and resource extraction fuel the global economy and development worldwide, they pose serious environmental hazards. Increases in conventional energy use mean parallel increases in emissions, including greenhouse gasses, which mean more smog, more global warming effects, and more risks to human and environmental health.

Renewable energy sources derive their energy from existing flows of energy, from on-going natural processes, such as sunshine, wind, flowing water, biological processes, and geothermal heat flows. A general definition of renewable energy sources is that renewable energy is captured from an energy resource that is replaced rapidly by a natural process such as power generated from the sun or from the wind. Currently, the most promising (economically most feasible) alternative energy sources include wind power, solar power, and hydroelectric power. Other renewable sources include geothermal and ocean energies, as well as biomass and ethanol as renewable fuels.

a. Geothermal Energy



17


b. Hydroelectric power

We have used running water as an energy source for thousands of years, mainly to grind corn. The first house in the world to be lit by hydroelectricity was Cragside House, in Northumberland, England, in 1878.

In 1882 on the Fox river, in the USA, hydroelectricity produced enough power to light two paper mills and a house. Nowadays there are many hydro-electric power stations, providing around 20% of the world's electricity.

The name comes from "hydro", the Greek word for water.

II. The Problem

1. Eco-conscious people, whether for residential or business purposes, are often quite excited about the wide variety of renewable energy options being developed. Although many are eager to implement these new technologies, deciding which solution will be more efficient may not be as easy as it might seem. A little research and even a bit of investment risk can help people choose renewable energy options that make sense for their local area.

2. With geothermal and hydro Power, among this renewable energy gives the best advantages?

III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION

In this case study, we will evaluate the two energy by economics, environment, and energy supply. Economics: capital cost, maintenance cost, and infrastructure cost. Environment: the land use, gas emissions, and waste products. Energy supply: the availability of the resource, technology for use of the resource, and reliability.

a. Geothermal Advantages.

Economics Low operating cost No fuel needed to operate

Environment

18

Very low emissions Energy Supply

Almost a renewable resource Drilling and steam cycle technologies are mature Reliable 24/7 High capacity factors

b. Hydro Power Advantages

Economicso Very low operating costs

Environmento Renewable resourceo Low emissionso No other waste streams

Energy Supplyo Mature technologyo High reliability o High capacity factors seasonally

c. Geothermal Disadvantages.

Economics Moderate capital costs Sometimes run out of steam

Environment Alter seismic activity in the area Needs to be carefully managed not to exhaust the source

Energy Supply Limited to suitable locations

d. Hydro Power Disadvantages

Economics High capital cost

Environment Large land use Social impact: displacement of populations Environmental impact: displacement of fauna and flora

19

Water quality and quantity downstream can be affected, which can have an impact on plant life.

Energy Supply Limited available locations Weather and season dependent Can’t turn it on and off Large construction times

IV. THE RESULTS

With the above information, on economic aspect, both of them has the advantages of low operating cost, but hydro power needs high capital cost.

On environmental aspect, both are renewable and also emit almost nothing to low emission. But with hydro power, it needs large area, and affect the flora and fauna, same with geothermal, it can alter seismic activity in the area. With this, geothermal has minimal impact to the environment compare to hydro power.

On Energy Supply, both are limited to available locations, but geothermal energy is much reliable compare to hydro.

V. Lessons Learned

Renewable energy has many advantages, and it is very environmental friendly. Further research found that 60% of Norway's energy comes from renewable sources. These energy sources include hydropower, which produces 99% of the electricity in mainland Norway; wind power; wood bio-energy; and, in a limited way, solar energy. Norway has plans to become carbon neutral by 2030. Norway also exports a great deal of its energy.

VI. Conclusion

With the results above, geothermal energy take advantage on all aspect, economically, environmentally, and energy supply. But it is not applicable in all location.

VII. Appendices

http://energyinformative.org/geothermal-energy-pros-and-cons/

20

http://serconline.org/RenewableEnergyIncentives/ http://www.wisegeek.com/how-much-of-norways-energy-is-renewable.htm http://www.darvill.clara.net/altenerg/index.htm http://www.conserve-energy-future.com http://www.conserve-energy-future.com/Advantages_HydroPower.php

HYDROELECTRICITY VS. SOLAR POWER

21

I. Introduction



Hydroelectric power

We have used running water as an energy source for thousands of years, mainly to grind corn. The first house in the world to be lit by hydroelectricity was Cragside House, in Northumberland, England, in 1878.

22

In 1882 on the Fox river, in the USA, hydroelectricity produced enough power to light two paper mills and a house. Nowadays there are many hydro-electric power stations, providing around 20% of the world's electricity.

The name comes from "hydro", the Greek word for water.

Solar Energy

In a sunny climate, you can get enough power to run a 100W light bulb from just one square meter of solar panel.

This was originally developed in order to provide electricity for satellites, but these days many of us own calculators powered by solar cells.

People are increasingly installing PV panels on their roofs. This costs thousands of pounds, but if you have a south-facing roof it can help with your electricity bills quite a bit, and the government pays you for any extra energy you produce and feed back into the National Grid (called the "feed-in tariff").

II. The Problem


2. With Solar and hydro Power, among this renewable energy gives the best advantages.



a. Solar Advantages.

• Economics

23

– No fuel Cost• Environment

– Renewable – Not emitting greenhouse gases.

• Energy Supply - In sunny countries, solar power can be used where there is no easy way to get electricity to a remote place.- Handy for low-power uses such as solar powered garden lights and battery chargers- It can be installed in residential houses.

b. Hydro Power Advantages

Economicso Very low operating costs

Environmento Renewable resourceo Low emissionso No other waste streams

Energy Supplyo Mature technologyo High reliability o High capacity factors seasonally

c. Solar Disadvantages.

• Economics– High capital costs– High maintenance costs– Needs backup Battery

• Environment– Large land use– Highly toxic waste in the manufacturing and disposal of solar panels– Visual impact on natural settings

• Energy Supply– Intermittent availability of fuel – Limited suitable locations – Very raw material intensive – Not a fully mature technology– Very low capacity factors (10-20%)

24

d. Hydro Power Disadvantages

Economics High capital cost

Environment Large land use Social impact: displacement of populations Environmental impact: displacement of fauna and flora Water quality and quantity downstream can be affected, which can have

an impact on plant life. Energy Supply

Limited available locations Weather and season dependent Can’t turn it on and off Large construction times

IV. The Results

With the above information, on economic aspect, both of them has a high capital cost, but solar power has a maintenance cost and it needs other back-up sources, like batteries and others.

On environmental aspect, both are renewable and also emit almost nothing to low emission. But in manufacturing the solar panel, it produces large amount of toxic waste, and also on its disposal.

On Energy Supply, solar power needs the sunlight in order to produce energy, so it is limited to day time usage only, compare to hydro power, its energy depends on the flow of water. And it’s much reliable compare to solar.

V. Lessons Learned

Thou renewable energy is promising, but beyond on its positive benefits, the manufacturing of the materials use for harnessing the energy produces toxic waste materials, that can harm us and the environment.

Renewable energy has many advantages, and it is very environmental friendly. Further research found that 60% of Norway's energy comes from renewable sources. These energy sources include hydropower, which produces 99% of the electricity in mainland Norway; wind power; wood bio-energy; and, in a limited way, solar energy. Norway has

25

plans to become carbon neutral by 2030. Norway also exports a great deal of its energy.

VI. Conclusion

With the results above, hydro energy take advantage on all aspect, economically, environmentally, and energy supply, thou it is not applicable in all location.

VII. Appendices

http://uccpbank.k12hsn.org/courses/APEnvironmentalScience/course%20files/readings/4e_RenewEnergy.pdf

http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/solar/photovoltaic-pv/solar-powers-toxic-footprint.html

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/03/are-your-solar-panels-toxic http://www.wisegeek.com/how-much-of-norways-energy-is-renewable.htm http://home.clara.net/darvill/altenerg/

26

SOLAR VS. BIOMASS

27

I. Introduction



Biomass

Wood was once our main fuel. We burned it to heat our homes and cook our food.

Wood still provides a small percentage of the energy we use, but its importance as an energy source is dwindling. Sugar cane is grown in some areas, and can be fermented to make alcohol, which can be burned to generate power. Alternatively, the cane can be crushed and the pulp (called "bagasse") can be burned, to make steam to drive turbines.

Other solid wastes, can be burned to provide heat, or used to make steam for a power station.

28

"Bioconversion" uses plant and animal wastes to produce "biofuels" such as methanol, natural gas, and oil.

We can use rubbish, animal manure, woodchips, seaweed, corn stalks and other wastes.

Solar Energy

In a sunny climate, you can get enough power to run a 100W light bulb from just one square meter of solar panel.

This was originally developed in order to provide electricity for satellites, but these days many of us own calculators powered by solar cells.

People are increasingly installing PV panels on their roofs. This costs thousands of pounds, but if you have a south-facing roof it can help with your electricity bills quite a bit, and the government pays you for any extra energy you produce and feed back into the National Grid (called the "feed-in tariff").

II. The Problem


2. With Solar Energy and Biomass, among this renewable energy gives the best advantages.



a. Solar Advantages.

• Economics– No fuel Cost

• Environment

29

– Renewable – Not emitting greenhouse gases.

• Energy Supply - In sunny countries, solar power can be used where there is no easy way to get electricity to a remote place.- Handy for low-power uses such as solar powered garden lights and battery chargers- It can be installed in residential houses.

b. Biomass Advantages

Economicso Needs bio product as fuel(usually thought of as garbage)

Environmento Emit lower levels of such atmospheric pollutants.o Biomass can be environmentally friendly because the biomass is reduced,

recycled and then reused. Energy Supply

o Fuel can be domestically produceo Modern biomass combustion systems are highly sophisticated, offering

combustion efficiency and emission levels.o Renewable resource because plants to make biomass can be grown over

and over.

c. Solar Disadvantages.

• Economics– High capital costs– High maintenance costs– Needs backup Battery

• Environment– Large land use– Highly toxic waste in the manufacturing and disposal of solar panels– Visual impact on natural settings

• Energy Supply– Intermittent availability of fuel – Limited suitable locations – Very raw material intensive

30

– Not a fully mature technology– Very low capacity factors (10-20%)

d. Biomass Disadvantages

Economics Potentially high cost for food crops Moderate Capital Cost

Environment Large land usage

Energy Supply Limited by production of crops and competition with food supply

IV. The Results

With the above information, on economic aspect, solar power has high capital and maintenance cost and it needs other back-up sources. Thou solar needs no fuel compare to biomass.

On environmental aspect, both are renewable and also emit almost nothing to low emission. But in manufacturing the solar panel, it produces large amount of toxic waste, and also on its disposal. Biomass also helps in cleanliness in villages and cities because Recycling of waste reduces pollution and spread of diseases.

On Energy Supply, solar power needs the sunlight in order to produce energy, so it is limited to day time usage only, compare to Biomass it depends on the availability of its fuel.

V. Lessons Learned

Renewable energy has many advantages, and it is very environmental friendly. Further research found that 60% of Norway's energy comes from renewable sources. These energy sources include hydropower, which produces 99% of the electricity in mainland Norway; wind power; wood bio-energy; and, in a limited way, solar energy. Norway has plans to become carbon neutral by 2030. Norway also exports a great deal of its energy.

31

Thou renewable energy is promising, but beyond on its positive benefits, the manufacturing of the materials use for harnessing the energy produces toxic waste materials, that can harm us and the environment.

Biomass residues, arising, co-products and waste not used for energy, or some other application will usually rot. This will generate CO2 in any case, and may also produce methane (CH4), a greenhouse gas 21 times more potent that CO2.

VI. Conclusion

With the results above, biomass take advantage on all aspect, economically, environmentally, and energy supply. It contributes highly in cleanliness and its environmental friendly.

VII. Appendices

http://www.darvill.clara.net/altenerg/solar.htm http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/solar/photovoltaic-pv/solar-powers-toxic-

footprint.html http://www.conserve-energy-future.com http://www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk/portal/page?

_pageid=76,15049&_dad=portal http://www.energyquest.ca.gov/story/chapter10.html

32

BIOMASS VS. GEOTHERMAL

33

I. Introduction



a. Biomass

Wood was once our main fuel. We burned it to heat our homes and cook our food.

Wood still provides a small percentage of the energy we use, but its importance as an energy source is dwindling. Sugar cane is grown in some areas, and can be fermented to make alcohol, which can be burned to generate power. Alternatively, the cane can be crushed and the pulp (called "bagasse") can be burned, to make steam to drive turbines.

Other solid wastes, can be burned to provide heat, or used to make steam for a power station.

34

"Bioconversion" uses plant and animal wastes to produce "biofuels" such as methanol, natural gas, and oil.

We can use rubbish, animal manure, woodchips, seaweed, corn stalks and other wastes.

b. Geothermal Energy




II. The Problem


2. With Geothermal Energy and Biomass, among this renewable energy gives the best advantages.



a. Geothermal Advantages.

Economics Low operating cost No fuel needed to operate

Environment

35

Very low emissions Energy Supply

Almost a renewable resource Drilling and steam cycle technologies are mature Reliable 24/7 High capacity factors

b. Biomass Advantages

Economicso Needs bio product as fuel(usually thought of as garbage)

Environmento Emit lower levels of such atmospheric pollutants.o Biomass can be environmentally friendly because the biomass is reduced,

recycled and then reused. Energy Supply

o Fuel can be domestically produceo Modern biomass combustion systems are highly sophisticated, offering

combustion efficiency and emission levels.o Renewable resource because plants to make biomass can be grown over

and over.

c. Geothermal Disadvantages.

Economics Moderate capital costs Sometimes run out of steam

Environment Alter seismic activity in the area Needs to be carefully managed not to exhaust the source

Energy Supply Limited to suitable locations

d. Biomass Disadvantages

Economics Potentially high cost for food crops Moderate Capital Cost

Environment Large land usage

Energy Supply

36

Limited by production of crops and competition with food supply

IV. The Results

With the above information, on economic aspect, geothermal takes advantage, because it relies on the heat of the earth’s surface compare to biomass, it still needs fuel.

On environmental aspect, both are renewable and also emit almost nothing to low emission. But biomass also helps in cleanliness in villages and cities because Recycling of waste reduces pollution and spread of diseases.

On Energy Supply, Geothermal is much reliable compare to biomass. Because it doesn’t need fuel in order to operate.

V. Lessons Learned

Renewable energy has many advantages, and it is very environmental friendly.

Biomass residues, arising, co-products and waste not used for energy, or some other application will usually rot. This will generate CO2 in any case, and may also produce methane (CH4), a greenhouse gas 21 times more potent that CO2.

Sustainable is another label used for renewable sources of energy. In other words, geothermal energy is a resource that can sustain its own consumption rate – Unlike conventional energy sources such as coal and fossil fuels. According to scientists, the energy in our geothermal reservoirs will literally last billions of years.

VI. Conclusion

With the results above, Geothermal takes 2 out of 3, on economics and energy supply. So Geothermal energy is much preferred compare to biomass. Thou geothermal energy needs a specific location to put up.

VII. Appendices

http://www.conserve-energy-future.com http://www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk/portal/page?

_pageid=76,15049&_dad=portal http://www.darvill.clara.net/altenerg http://energyinformative.org/geothermal-energy-pros-and-cons/ http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/geothermal-energy/page-5

37

38

Documents

A CASE STUDY IN VARIOUS RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES