Energy Planning ProposalMajida Ismaili AlaouiSCI/362October 14, 2013Brandy SchroederEnergy Planning ProposalEnergy sources cost money, in particular to service large areas, money is not the only factor to evaluate, but quality of the energy and its safety should be in the view while taking a decision to select one that can evolve both factors. Renewable energy has many positive aspects, and it can be a good choice for the city and its environment. This energy renews itself, without the threat of running out, or depleting. Renewable energy is cost effective, does not cause pollution, nor emit greenhouse gases, which is good for the city environment and far from causing global warming.
There are many energy sources available, and after evaluating the cons and pros of each one, the city came up with the best choice that can suit its needs, which is wind power, hydroelectric, and nuclear power sources. With an estimate of 10 billion dollars, this amount can cover the cost of these sources and enough finding to begin the plan.Wind is a clean source of renewable energy, it does not produce any air or water pollution, plus wind is free. The cost of its operations is nearly nothing once a turbine is erected. Mass production and technology are making turbines cheaper, and many governments offer tax incentives to encourage wind development.Hydroelectric is a renewable energy is generated by the force of falling water. It is considered as one of the cleanest sources of energy, reliable and cost effective. Water is needed to make the hydroelectric power unit function.
The water is held behind a dam to form a reservoir; the power or the strength of the water released from the reservoir through the dam spins the blades of a turbine. After the water has produced energy, it flows back to the reservoir for re-use.Nuclear energy is a power that does not burn anything to produce energy.
There are no dangerous or harmful gases to endanger the environment. This energy does not cause global warming through the release of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases. The powerplant does not consume harmful or pollutant water, which is safe for the aquatic life as well as the water surrounding the plant is clean, and that provides birds, fish, and other wildlife safe environment to be. Nuclear energy promotes land and habitat preservation.
Nuclear power plants produce a large amount of electricity in a small space, and they need a big land for their operations contrary to many other energy sources. The advantages and the disadvantages of these energy sources are taken in consideration by the city. Wind power can be problematic if no wind occurs, and this can cause an insufficient energy production. Therefore, more turbines need to be added to keep up with energy demands, in that sense more spaces or land need to be taken in consideration. Concerning Hydroelectric, its facilities are costly to implement and chances are it can cause flooding to its surrounding. As these facilities are constructed close to rivers. This can cause a threat to wildlife and ecological problems.
Then comes Nuclear energy dispose nuclear waste that can be hard to handle or get rid of. The areas around nuclear waste can be harmful and contagious if any leak happens. Therefore, there are a many regulations in place concerning implementing nuclear power energy, which can be costly and time consuming.The budget of the year is 10 billion dollars.
To implement the three energy sources it is an estimate of 9,380,000,000 dollars, 30 million for the first year for maintenance. That is six billion dollars for a nuclear plant, three billion for wind power and 350 million for hydroelectric facility. A 620 million dollars as a saving of the initial budget for the first year that can cover sudden, and unanticipated expenses or improvements. The chart below will demonstrate each energy source and its cost for the city. Source Of Energy | Max Energy Output | Initial Cost Of Energy Production | Monthly Cost Involved | Yearly Cost | Nuclear Plant | 1,000 Megawatts | $6 billion | $1.
5 Million | $18 million | Hydroelectric Facility | 1,000 Megawatts | $350 million | $500,000 | $6 million | Wind Power | 1,000 Megawatts | $3 billion | $500,000 | $6 million | Totals | 3,000 Megawatts | 9,350,000,000 | $2.5 million | $30 million |The growth of population is an estimable statistics, and the demands of energy will also grow, therefore to determine the effects of the population growth on this energy plan is not realistic. The control of the future and the population is something hard to predict.
Technology is not a steady progress, it grows and develops with time, and with the growth of the population. The more population, the greater is the demand of energy sources.ReferencesNational Geographic. (1993-2013). Wind Power. Retrieved from http://environment.
nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/wind-power-profile/TVA Kids. (2013). Hydroelectric Power. Retrieved from http://www.
(2013). Environment. Retrieved from http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/Community/Environment.shtm