Montreal, Canada. November 2014.

HASTA LA VISTA, CONVENTIONAL POWER?

The Fukushima disaster has been the deflection point for conventional power facilities
(e.g., nuclear, coal, and gas), triggering a vast implementation of renewable sources of energy,
resulting not only in an uncertain future for energy from nuclear reactions, but also for energy
from coal and gas. However, this abrupt transition has induced issues which will take too long to
be solved before shutting down the last conventional plant. Therefore, we should be conscious of
drawbacks of green technologies as these can have an impact on their credibility as non-polluting
sources, their viability as zero or low-carbon electricity technologies, and their reliability to supply
energy.
We admit that renewable sources of
energy (RSE) have made great strides in a short
period of time. Advances in solar generation have
allowed many countries of the European Union,
such as Germany, to supply a large portion of their
electricity demand during peak hours (Winter,
2014). We also admit that nuclear plants and carbon producers are allocating more resources to
projects involving wind, solar, and wood facilities (Butcher, 2013). Furthermore, the boom of green
technologies has allowed the emergence of new markets oriented to materials development,
carbon bonus trading, and efficient energy regulating policies which dynamize the global economy.

1/3

The boom in renewable energy is indeed an important milestone in the path toward
cleaner power, yet we have to consider that current RSE technologies do not guarantee zero
pollution. We recognize that nuclear plants generate harmful radiation, carbon facilities emit
carbon-based compounds, and natural gas cycles generate nitrogen oxides (Bordeleau, 2011). Still,
we cannot make sure of the carbon neutrality of RSE from wood, from instance, whose supply
chain generates almost twice as much carbon as a coal-fired plant (Corbis, 2013), or the
eco-friendliness of wind farms, as their operation drastically increases downstream temperature
(Gray, 2012). Admittedly, conventional facilities need more development in terms of
harmful-compound sequestration and waste disposal. However, the most viable low/zero carbon
technologies are neither solar nor wind; nuclear and gas cycles are more cost-effective at avoiding
or sequestering emissions (Frank, 2014).
Aside from its high cost-pollution ratio, the
high reliability in terms of power supply is the
most remarkable advantage of conventional
power, while RSE cannot guarantee steady power
supply because of the intermittence of the
sources. Admittedly, as Fripp points out, this phenomenon can be reduced by combining both
wind and solar power (2011). We must indeed admit that by integrating these two sources of
energy, we increase the reliability of the power supply. Nevertheless, power supply from nuclear
and fossil fuels is certainly more reliable and stable, which allows utilities to sell up to 75% of their
power one to three years ahead since fuel is always available regardless the weather (Butcher,
2013). Furthermore, nuclear and coal plants allow flexible operating ranges from 75% up to 110%
of their capacity, depending on the demand (Rayaprolu, 2012).

2/3

In conclusion, older technologies of power generation are more dependable as their

procedures and outputs have been widely studied. Meanwhile, renewable sources of energy are
struggling to evolve or to snatch a bigger portion of the demand. We should be attentive to the
progress of green technologies as not all of them are so green, viable, or reliable; we hope that
once all these technologies have converged into an eco-friendly group of facilities, the outcome
will not have compromised the needs of future generations because of the needs of today.
Edwin Ramos, 2014.

REFERENCES
1. Butcher, B. (2013, October 12). How to lose half a trillion euros. The Economist, 27.
2. Bordeleau, S. (2011, March 30). Natural gas: cheap, cleaner than coal, but still a pollution
concern. Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
3. Corbis, M. (2013, April 6). Wood: The fuel of the future. Retrieved October 23, 2014, from
http://www.economist.com/news/business
4. Frank, C. (2014, August 22). The cost of renewable energy. Retrieved October 24, 2014, from
http://www.economist.com/news/business
5. Fripp, M. (2011, November). Economist debates: renewables. Retrieved October 25, 2014, from
http://www.economist.com/debate
6. Gray, L. (2012, April). Wind farms can cause climate change. Retrieved October 24, 2014, from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews
7. Rayaprolu, K. (2009). Boilers for power and process (p. 8). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
8. Winter, C. (2014, August 14). Germany reaches new level of greendom. Retrieved November 4,
2014, from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/

3/3