What could replace nuclear energy ?

Based on order of magnitude, here are the equivalent installation needed to produce as muhc energy as one nuclear reactor (usually, there are 2 to 4 ,to sometimes more by power plant), producing about 1000MW.

  • 100 geothermal production stations (10MW by station)
  • 200 wind turbine (5MW each)
  • 5 coal, gas, oil, … power plant (200 MW by power plant)
  • 10 million square meters of solar panels (about 100W per square meter)
  • A little less than one hydroelectric dam  (1 à 10 GW by dam)

Of course, those quantities are subject to variation depending on the situation, but it can give us a good sense of the things. We can conclude that : solar panel are not a credible alternative to nuclear energy, wind-mills are serious contender, but you need to have wind. Finally, geothermal energy sounds quite interesting.


3 Comments on “What could replace nuclear energy ?”

  1. Julien says:

    I do not agree with your conclusions.

    Let’s say in France we’ve got about 50 reactors for 60 million people, while this energy represents 80% of the country’s consumption.
    That is roughly one reactor for 1 million people.

    Now you say one reactor is equivalent to 10 million sqm of solar panels. This gives 10 sqm of solar panel per inhabitant. How not credible ?

    Then if you use at the same time all the renewable energies you talked about, I would say your figures look VERY optimistic !

  2. GP Codrington says:

    As a base load nothing what we need is storage capacity!!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s