Comments on: Volcano Power instead of Nuclear would put Indonesia ahead in Green Energy Actions http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/ Life is what you make it! Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:04:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: harinder singh http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-54116 harinder singh Sat, 16 Jul 2011 12:38:28 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-54116 i like geo tharmal i like geo tharmal

]]> By: hira http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-50637 hira Fri, 03 Dec 2010 04:36:20 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-50637 our goverment only sleeping around and eat wage without work, we only people not goverment so everthing like that shit depend on our goverment. our goverment only sleeping around and eat wage without work, we only people not goverment so everthing like that shit depend on our goverment.

]]> By: Sally http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-47452 Sally Sat, 27 Feb 2010 12:00:20 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-47452 Does anyone know if construction has begun? Information is hard to find on it. Does anyone know if construction has begun? Information is hard to find on it.

]]> By: camilla http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-44365 camilla Fri, 30 Jan 2009 04:45:34 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-44365 i heard indonesia have most volcano :-B i heard indonesia have most volcano

]]> By: Teddy Ardiansyah http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43558 Teddy Ardiansyah Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:56:34 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43558 Good then. Good then.

]]> By: Chris http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43543 Chris Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:26:15 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43543 Funnily - even Google jumped now on the Geothermal wagon. They want to <a href="http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0820-geothermal.html" rel="nofollow">invest 10 Mio Dollar</a> in "enhanced geothermal systems" (EGS) to improve the potential of geothermal energy, which harnesses the heat of Earth's core to generate power. Not much, but a start. :-B Funnily – even Google jumped now on the Geothermal wagon. They want to invest 10 Mio Dollar in “enhanced geothermal systems” (EGS) to improve the potential of geothermal energy, which harnesses the heat of Earth’s core to generate power.

Not much, but a start.

]]> By: Teddy Ardiansyah http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43515 Teddy Ardiansyah Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:23:33 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43515 In providing energy one can not just think about power generation, but also thermal efficiency and other factors concerned. Some disadvantages of geothermal are: 1. It has low efficiency and low power generation. Thermodynamics law stated that the higher the temperature, the higher the efficiency. The temperature for geothermal power plant is not high enough compare to the fossil or nuclear power plant. Nuclear power plant can operate at 300 degree C, while geothermal is lower than that. That means fossil and nuclear power plants have higher thermal efficiency than geothermal. One geothermal power plant (well) can produce around a few kilo watts/mega watts, while one nuclear power plant can produce up to 1000 MW. You can not use electricity from geothermal for industrial use, only for domestics use that close to the plant sites. Industries need higher power of several hundred MW, and it can only be achieved by nuclear or fossil power plants. Whether you like or not, fossil and nuclear power plants are the only answers for industries. 2. The steam coming out from geothermal contains CO2, nitric oxide, and sulfur. These gases are very poisonous. In Dieng, central java, hundreds of people died because they inhaled the steam coming out from geothermal. This is a fact. Hot water coming from geothermal also contains mercury, arsenic, antimony, etc. These are dangerous elements if released to the environment or disposed into rivers. Nuclear power plants definitely do not emits such kinds of substances. Yes, radiations are emitted from nuclear power plants but still below the limit prescribed by the IAEA. 3. The fluid from geothermal is corrosive to the plant pipes. More maintenance works needed to replace the corrosive pipes. The corrosive pipes can allow fluids that contains dangerous elements as I mentioned in no.2 above to penetrate into the piping systems and damage the inner parts of the plant systems, as well as lower its efficiency. 4. The geothermal well can dry up and can not be used again to produce electricity. That means geothermal is not renewable. You have to find another well and build another geothermal power plant. In providing energy one can not just think about power generation, but also thermal efficiency and other factors concerned. Some disadvantages of geothermal are:
1. It has low efficiency and low power generation. Thermodynamics law stated that the higher the temperature, the higher the efficiency. The temperature for geothermal power plant is not high enough compare to the fossil or nuclear power plant. Nuclear power plant can operate at 300 degree C, while geothermal is lower than that. That means fossil and nuclear power plants have higher thermal efficiency than geothermal. One geothermal power plant (well) can produce around a few kilo watts/mega watts, while one nuclear power plant can produce up to 1000 MW. You can not use electricity from geothermal for industrial use, only for domestics use that close to the plant sites. Industries need higher power of several hundred MW, and it can only be achieved by nuclear or fossil power plants. Whether you like or not, fossil and nuclear power plants are the only answers for industries.
2. The steam coming out from geothermal contains CO2, nitric oxide, and sulfur. These gases are very poisonous. In Dieng, central java, hundreds of people died because they inhaled the steam coming out from geothermal. This is a fact. Hot water coming from geothermal also contains mercury, arsenic, antimony, etc. These are dangerous elements if released to the environment or disposed into rivers. Nuclear power plants definitely do not emits such kinds of substances. Yes, radiations are emitted from nuclear power plants but still below the limit prescribed by the IAEA.
3. The fluid from geothermal is corrosive to the plant pipes. More maintenance works needed to replace the corrosive pipes. The corrosive pipes can allow fluids that contains dangerous elements as I mentioned in no.2 above to penetrate into the piping systems and damage the inner parts of the plant systems, as well as lower its efficiency.
4. The geothermal well can dry up and can not be used again to produce electricity. That means geothermal is not renewable. You have to find another well and build another geothermal power plant.

]]> By: Chris http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43368 Chris Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:22:20 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43368 <strong>Ardiansyah Teddy</strong>, do you mean Nuclear Plants are more 'green' than Geothermal plants? Can you please detail that a bit? What I see, with Geothermal Plants, there are no chemicals added or waste created, which can't be disposed over many hundreds of years. Nuclear plants might not emit CO2 right now, but the nuclear waste is much worse and nobody even found a solution for that, <strong>until now</strong>. As well, even most 1st world countries can't run them safe, just last week there were 2 incidents in France, we had some in Germany before, the UK had a few near disasters a few years back (e.g. in Sellafield). In the recent Tokyo earthquake, nuclear plants had to be shut down as well. Imagine Nuclear Plants in Indonesia and for me that's a recipe for disaster! Ardiansyah Teddy, do you mean Nuclear Plants are more ‘green’ than Geothermal plants? Can you please detail that a bit?

What I see, with Geothermal Plants, there are no chemicals added or waste created, which can’t be disposed over many hundreds of years.

Nuclear plants might not emit CO2 right now, but the nuclear waste is much worse and nobody even found a solution for that, until now.

As well, even most 1st world countries can’t run them safe, just last week there were 2 incidents in France, we had some in Germany before, the UK had a few near disasters a few years back (e.g. in Sellafield). In the recent Tokyo earthquake, nuclear plants had to be shut down as well. Imagine Nuclear Plants in Indonesia and for me that’s a recipe for disaster!

]]> By: Ardiansyah Teddy http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43365 Ardiansyah Teddy Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:10:57 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43365 What do you mean by "green"? Don`t you know that nuclear power plant does not emit CO2. Geothermal power plants emit CO2 and others dangerous chemical substances. I don`t think geothermal is a "green" energy source. I don`t understand with your point of minor consequences using geothermal. Do you think environmental pollution due to geothermal power plants activity is minor? Nuclear power plant is safe to be built in Indonesia. IAEA already agreed with the site, that means everything is fine, even though Indonesia is surrounded by volcanoes and earthquakes. So I think nuclear power plant is a "green" and safe to be built in Indonesia. If you want to discuss more about nuclear energy, you can discuss with me. Regards, Ardiansyah Teddy Integrated Doctoral Education student of Nuclear Engineering Tokyo Institute of Technology What do you mean by “green”? Don`t you know that nuclear power plant does not emit CO2. Geothermal power plants emit CO2 and others dangerous chemical substances. I don`t think geothermal is a “green” energy source. I don`t understand with your point of minor consequences using geothermal. Do you think environmental pollution due to geothermal power plants activity is minor? Nuclear power plant is safe to be built in Indonesia. IAEA already agreed with the site, that means everything is fine, even though Indonesia is surrounded by volcanoes and earthquakes. So I think nuclear power plant is a “green” and safe to be built in Indonesia. If you want to discuss more about nuclear energy, you can discuss with me.

Regards,
Ardiansyah Teddy
Integrated Doctoral Education student of Nuclear Engineering
Tokyo Institute of Technology

]]> By: Byamato http://www.nomad4ever.com/2008/06/30/volcano-power-instead-of-nuclear-would-put-indonesia-ahead-in-green-energy-actions/#comment-43233 Byamato Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:47:17 +0000 http://www.nomad4ever.com/?p=561#comment-43233 re: ‘laizze faire’ attitude. Exactly. One of my main concerns why we should never build a nuclear powered plant here. Ever. The fact that the technocrats are keenly pushing the plans, even by dubious statements like "the public support it", is only making it more obvious. re: ‘laizze faire’ attitude.

Exactly. One of my main concerns why we should never build a nuclear powered plant here. Ever.
The fact that the technocrats are keenly pushing the plans, even by dubious statements like “the public support it”, is only making it more obvious.

]]>