• Home
  • About Dan
  • Books by Daniel Botkin
    • Signed Books
  • Reflections & Opinions
    • Renegade Naturalist Radio
  • Research
  • Dan Botkin’s Newsletter
    • Manage Your Account
  • Speaking & Consulting

Daniel B. Botkin

Solving environmental problems by understanding how nature works

  • People & Nature
  • Climate, Energy & Biodiversity
  • Myths, Folklore & Science

Energy Pros and Cons

March 19, 2007 By Daniel Botkin 12 Comments

Energy is the number one environmental problem today. But we don't want to minimize our use of energy --- abundant energy makes possible civilization, especially our kind of high-technology civilization. So the question is: how can we maintain abundant sources of energy without ruining our environment? Here is some information that can help.
This post is under construction.

Pros and Cons of Some Energy Sources

SourceProvidesUpsideDownside
CoalNearly 60% of electricity and 25% of total energy in the United States today; probably will not increase in % because of environmental effectsWorld’s most abundant fossil fuel; Many coal-fired plants are inplace; 250 years worth of fuel.World’s most abundant fossil fuel; most polluting; along with nuclear the most dangerous; coal mining is a major environmental and human health problem.
Nuclear:
Conventional
Today: 1/6 of the world's electricity. In the future: Known conventional nuclear reactor fuel will run out in about a century.Doesn't produce greenhouse gases.Most dangerous to people and environment; waste disposal an unsolved problem; power plants expensive and slow to build; expensive to run, and have very limited lifetimes.
SolarMore than the world uses or will ever use.Nonpolluting and renewable; works now.Needs improved grid and storage.
WindTexas and the Dakotas alone can provide all the electricity needed in the United States.Nonpolluting and renewable; works now.Needs improved electrical grid for distribution and new storage methods; some birds are killed flying into windmill blades; NIMBY (not in my backyard) problem: view and sound of windmills bothers some people.

Pros and Cons of Energy Sources: More Information

SourceDangersWho GainsWho Loses
CoalGlobal warming; acid rain; release of toxic metals and compounds harmful to human health, other life forms, and ecosystems, such as mercury, sulfur oxides.Big Power and Coal Corporations.Everyone and every ecosystem exposed to coal burning pollutants; global climate change; miners' health; land strip-mined.
Nuclear:
Conventional
Wastes and spills remain very toxic for 10,000 years.Previous investors in nuclear power.People who live near and own property near the power plants; people subjected to radioactive wastes.
SolarNone.Everybody.Investors in conventional power.
WindDifficult to brake the blades; in very high winds, the machine can self-destruct.All users of electricity.Those who dislike living near windmill installations.

Copyright © 2010 Daniel B. Botkin
From my book Powering the Future: A Scientist's Guide to Energy Independence, FT Press

Share Button

Filed Under: Climate, Energy & Biodiversity, Energy & Environment

Comments

  1. kelly says

    December 15, 2009 at 8:16 pm

    what about other energies like hydro power, and geothermal? There’s also biomass, I’d like to know stuff about those sources of energy too please.

    Reply
    • Dan says

      December 21, 2009 at 5:06 pm

      Good question. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I discuss these in my forthcoming book, “Powering the Future.” Briefly, low density geothermal — the heat stored in the ground below your feet, mainly sunlight that has been absorbed or transported downward by water and air, offers an inexpensive and widespread form of heating and cooling. This is gaining popularity and will be one of the least expensive and best heating and cooling energy sources. If you’re going to build a new house, look into this.

      Hydropower: The experts agree that almost all the best sites for standard hydropower in developed nations are already in use. The U. S. Energy Department estimates that hydropower is likely to decrease as an source in the future rather than increase, because dams are being removed for environmental and safety reasons. The few hydropower sites in development in other parts of the world are causing a lot of discussion and environmental concern. So this is unlikely that water power will add signficantly to energy independence.

      Reply
  2. third demon says

    February 3, 2010 at 2:40 pm

    what is with all this money and not having enough for energy? i say we find one element of energy and invest everything we into improving the way we use or how we use it until we have once more a reliable source to count on.

    Reply
  3. Daniel Estrada says

    January 28, 2011 at 10:12 am

    what about coal
    its a good resource but it kills everything due to mining and other stuff. cant there be a friendly element that is good and also healthy for the environment

    Reply
  4. mike says

    January 12, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    coal energy in my town provides jobs. for one, the coal is already mined. it is usually silt. the aftermath of processing coal. since its discovery the miners would put the silt in what they call silt wells from processesing coal like “rice” coal. this is what the cogens burn to make energy. this creats jobs. and in pa they aren’t tunneling into the ground like in the 1800’s. they strip mine and then reclamate the land back. they need bookkeepers, welders machine operators.mechanics. drivers. etc. who need doctors dentists gasoline groceries cars. etc. who need energy to run. clean up its exhaust. its a win for everyone.

    Reply
  5. John Thronton says

    January 25, 2012 at 8:58 pm

    you know, there is now a efficient way to get rid of nuclear wastes without doing any damage to the environment and nuclear power is the most efficient power system we can have, just there is so many stereotypes about it, no-one likes them

    Reply
  6. Mark Daume says

    June 4, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    Many states can, and should, be following California’s lead in wind-powered energy. It does not cost a penny after connecting the necessary parts. To those who say that it’s unsightly, they don’t have to look at it. Don’t build homes next to it.

    Reply
  7. Jordan says

    February 20, 2013 at 7:32 pm

    Okay, what about Algae biofuels? They work against global warming, can be hybridized with a coal plantation or oil refinery, provides high energy, and can eat nuclear waste. 🙂

    Reply
    • Daniel Botkin says

      February 24, 2013 at 12:20 pm

      Yes, algae biofuels have their uses. I discuss these in Chapter 9 of Powering the Future: A Scientist’s Guide to Energy Independence. And in chapter 13 I recommend government development of these fuels. But they have a major limitation: water use. Right now, the Feds state that 49% of water use in the U.S. is to cool power plants (fossil fuel and nuclear). We are seriously overusing our fresh water aquifers. So in the long run, algae fuels will have a place, but the major of our nonfossil fuel energy is better coming from solar, wind, new hydroturbines (that float in a river and do not block fish passage) and ocean energy. The last is the farthest in the future.

      Reply
  8. webpage says

    July 16, 2013 at 11:38 pm

    Thanks to my father who informed me on the topic
    of this blog, this webpage is genuinely awesome.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

From Daniel B. Botkin, Ph.D

Daniel Botkin
I believe we are mostly on the wrong track in the way we try to deal with the environment. Everything I do, study, learn, and advise about the environment is different from the status quo. Throughout my career, I have tried to understand how nature works and use that understanding to figure out how we can solve our most pressing environmental problems.

My process over the past 45 years has been to look carefully at the facts, make simple calculations from them (sometimes simple computer models) and then tell people what I have learned. It’s surprising how rarely people bother to look at the facts. This has surprised me every time I’ve started a new ecology research project or work on an environmental issue.

In the course of my work and studies, I have learned many things and I want to tell you about them. That is the purpose of this website.

Follow @danielbotkin

Books by Dan Botkin

The Moon in the Nautilus Shell  Strange Encounters
Powering the Future  No Man's Garden
See all books by Dan Botkin

Jabowa III Forest Model


Jabowa Forest Model
Jabowa Forest Model for Windows 7.
This forest model, used around the world, was developed first in 1970 by Daniel B. Botkin, James F. Janak and James R. Wallis

JABOWA remains the most completely detailed and well validated forest growth model available, accounting for 95% or more of the variation in real forests where it has been tested.

The book Forest Dynamics: An Ecological Model (available as an eBook) provides a complete description of the model and the rationales behind its development.

Order Online

Sea Ice Study

The Bockstoce and Botkin Historical Sea Ice Data Study has a new home at the University of Alaska website. The data include more than 52,000 daily observations in an unbroken 65 year record from 1849 – 1914.

See related papers

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2006–2023 Daniel B. Botkin · Site by Webdancers · Log in