A spin-off of fusion research, "millimeter wave drilling," is opening up places that previously would not have been considered for Geo.
It permits drilling by vaporizing rock to a depth of 20 KM at a temperature of 600 °C.
As to Green Hydrogen, as the cost of wind and solar has come down, the attractiveness of Green Hydrogen goes up. Using green energy to make green energy.
Does Ireland have good geothermal potential (high temp at low depths)? Using leftover wind (after covering power) has the issue that you need a lot of low utilization electolysers to use the excess power when it is available. Wind is variable in output, in that it produces a fraction of capacity most of the time, which is even worse for electrolysers as the more you add relative to wind capacity the lower utilization they will get, but if you don't you curtail wind output. Solar is more of a binary - near full power during the day, none when dark and only a bit of time in between or cloudy when you get partial load.
This is possibly one of the best (safest) ways to go. That and use LESS energy. Also, there is no effective incentive in industry to reduce the energy footprint of even common household items to the extent that it should be. But that is a broader issue. Putting an A+ sticker on something doesn't cut it. That is where we should be directing our keenest minds and efforts. A key principle of engineering is efficiency. That gets dumped in favour of commercialism and greed, every time.
Gytis- I appreciate learning about insights on the nuclear questions from you through this piece. Especially as governmental changes are happening where I am across the pond in America.
Any proponent of nuclear glosses over all of the inconvenient truths including that of toxic, radioactive waste. Many thousands of spent fuel pools littered across the globe would ensure total destruction of life on earth, in the event of a broad (or even minor) scale natural disaster / grid failure. We know these events do occur. These toxic pools for example, would boil off rapidly and the resulting gasses dispersed into the atmosphere, moments after mans hand slips from the wheel. The problem of nuclear waste is not solved by any safe measure or means. The immense hubris of those today who would ignore that decisions made now, could so profoundly impact future generations at such great risk of irreparable damage, is beyond belief. Anybody who writes an article promoting nuclear energy as a viable source for ever increasing, extremely wasteful and gluttonous demands for energy lack either the inherent logic or sensibility that the majority of those who live on a tiny island at the edge of the Atlantic know very well. Lest we forget, Fukushima remains a complete and tragic disaster with no effective remedy, to date. NO to nuclear. Éirinn go Brách.
The people would oust them. Thankfully, most of the population would rather get in a ditch and die than stick a nuclear facility in their back yard, because Ireland is an island, small enough that your back yard, is my back yard, and I won't have you making a potentially Godawful mess of it, under any circumstances! Ok? ;)
A spin-off of fusion research, "millimeter wave drilling," is opening up places that previously would not have been considered for Geo.
It permits drilling by vaporizing rock to a depth of 20 KM at a temperature of 600 °C.
As to Green Hydrogen, as the cost of wind and solar has come down, the attractiveness of Green Hydrogen goes up. Using green energy to make green energy.
https://www.quaise.energy/
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...-supercritical
https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/world-s-largest-green-hydrogen-project-unveiled-in-texas-with-plan-to-produce-clean-rocket-fuel-for-elon-musk/2-1-1178689
It will likely be quicker and less expensive to embrace Geothermal and Green Hydrogen than Nuclear. Both have also made recent progress.
Does Ireland have good geothermal potential (high temp at low depths)? Using leftover wind (after covering power) has the issue that you need a lot of low utilization electolysers to use the excess power when it is available. Wind is variable in output, in that it produces a fraction of capacity most of the time, which is even worse for electrolysers as the more you add relative to wind capacity the lower utilization they will get, but if you don't you curtail wind output. Solar is more of a binary - near full power during the day, none when dark and only a bit of time in between or cloudy when you get partial load.
This is possibly one of the best (safest) ways to go. That and use LESS energy. Also, there is no effective incentive in industry to reduce the energy footprint of even common household items to the extent that it should be. But that is a broader issue. Putting an A+ sticker on something doesn't cut it. That is where we should be directing our keenest minds and efforts. A key principle of engineering is efficiency. That gets dumped in favour of commercialism and greed, every time.
Gytis- I appreciate learning about insights on the nuclear questions from you through this piece. Especially as governmental changes are happening where I am across the pond in America.
Any proponent of nuclear glosses over all of the inconvenient truths including that of toxic, radioactive waste. Many thousands of spent fuel pools littered across the globe would ensure total destruction of life on earth, in the event of a broad (or even minor) scale natural disaster / grid failure. We know these events do occur. These toxic pools for example, would boil off rapidly and the resulting gasses dispersed into the atmosphere, moments after mans hand slips from the wheel. The problem of nuclear waste is not solved by any safe measure or means. The immense hubris of those today who would ignore that decisions made now, could so profoundly impact future generations at such great risk of irreparable damage, is beyond belief. Anybody who writes an article promoting nuclear energy as a viable source for ever increasing, extremely wasteful and gluttonous demands for energy lack either the inherent logic or sensibility that the majority of those who live on a tiny island at the edge of the Atlantic know very well. Lest we forget, Fukushima remains a complete and tragic disaster with no effective remedy, to date. NO to nuclear. Éirinn go Brách.
Do any of the major parties in Ireland support nuclear or have factions within them that do so?
The people would oust them. Thankfully, most of the population would rather get in a ditch and die than stick a nuclear facility in their back yard, because Ireland is an island, small enough that your back yard, is my back yard, and I won't have you making a potentially Godawful mess of it, under any circumstances! Ok? ;)