Carbon Free-Nuclear Free

Here's a free book on how the US can achieve carbon-free, nuclear-free energy by 2040: http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/CarbonFreeNuclearFree.pdf.

Anyone want to join my anti-nuclear team?

Grist Article on Efficiency

Had this article sent to the Sustainable Design Thinking class from Cameron Tonkinwise. Short but sweet.

find it here: http://www.grist.org/list/2011-03-29-how-americans-defeated-efficiency-with-consumerism

Deaths per TWh

How deadly is nuclear energy

Would a New Nuclear Plant Fare Better Than Fukushima?

Would a New Nuclear Plant Fare Better Than Fukushima?

Series of events at Fukushima Nuclear Plant

Comprehensive Information on Building Energy Data

Al Jazeera OP piece

Found this interesting opinion piece about stopping the use of nuclear power . It's a little showy, but I think he makes some good points.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011317104344324144.html#

Radiation Dose Chart

Interesting NYT article: insight into the recent events in Japan through the lens of the Chernobyl disaster

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/weekinreview/20chernobyl.html?adxnnl=1&ref=asia&adxnnlx=1300806057-GC5NUVse9067R2kCgrvS2A

Large Potential for Wind- Limited Feasibility

I’ve completed my initial calculations of the potential for wind energy in the US. There is a huge discrepancy between how much wind power exists, and how much we could actually capture with the constraints of land area. The US Department of Energy released a plan in 2006 to have 20% wind energy by 2030, meaning 300 MW or 3.6 quads. This would cost about $47 billion dollars (in 2011 dollars). It would take up 50,000 km² of space, though the footprint of all the infrastructure including turbines and roads would only be 1,000-2,500 km². The total space needed would amount to about .5% of the US’s land area. However, the capacity for wind energy is far beyond this scenario. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that the US potential for wind in the 48 states is 10.5 TW or 126 quads. This would have the installation cost of approximately $2.2 x 10⁴, which is significantly less than our estimate the cost for achieving our country’s nuclear potential. However, it would require 26.89% of the land area.

German solar hits 10 GW

COLUMBIA WAVE POWER

http://www.columbiapwr.com/

Meltdown in Japan

Step one to a fossile fuel free America.

The first step in our mission to rid the America of Fossil Fuels is to tack down an over all number of total energy consumed by the U.S. (the number we agreed on is 98 QBtu's). We must then see what contributions our respective fields [transportation and building efficiency, tidal, nuclear, wind, and solar] can make to bridging the energy deficit (as a % of the 98 QBtu's) that would inevitably be caused by a complete abandonment of fossil fuels as a source of energy.

This chart is our first attempt to arrive at a workable set of figures that we could use to account for renewable energy.

Note: [Tidal, wind, solar, and nuclear are concerned with the production of energy while building and transportation efficiency deal with the reduction of over all energy use.]

ALL THE ENERGY INFORMATION YOU COULD EVER NEED.

For our project we are going to need to isolate a number (consumption of BTU's, or something) and work down from it. Everybody is going to need to sign on to account for a certain percent of the total number of BTU's consumed. [For example, my sector, building and design can account for a (%20 - %25) reduction of the over all number of BTU's consumed.] People who are looking into renewable methods of energy creating should attempt to pledge to create a certain percent of energy. [E.x. if wind power could pledge to account for %20 of the total energy needed.

The two sites with figures on over all energy consumption.

WE NEED A CONCRETE NUMBER

WORLD BANK U.S. Public information

Energy Information Administration

Current Generation

Differences Between Energy Efficiency and Demand Response

Link to Kate Rowland's Feb 22, 2011 article