16 May 2012
NHP are proud to release the latest edition of Technical News, ‘Renewable Energy Part Two: Solar, Wind and the future for Renewable'.
In the last edition of technical news (Edition #63) the difference between renewable and non-renewable sources of energy were discussed, with a variety of renewable energy sources highlighted including direct heating, hydro-power generation, bio-mass and tidal power.
In this latest issue of technical news, the discussion continues with exploration of photovoltaic solar energy and wind energy to complete your understanding of this important industry.
To download a personal copy of the latest edition of Technical News,‘Renewable Energy Part Two: Solar, Wind and the future for Renewable ‘, simply click here.
You can now also catch up on all of NHP's past editions of Technical News and register to recieve future editions by visiting our Technical News library!
First and foremost, rewneable indicates that we can re-generate the energy source and/or the energy source can be re-generated. Non-rewneable energy sources are fine as long as there is more than enough supply of that energy source to last for our life times, the life times of our friends and family, and the life-times of their friends and family, and so on. Sometime down the road however, there will come a time that we will run out of the supply of non-rewneable energy. Ethically, if we care about the people at the time that we run out, we will find alternatives now. Putting ethics and reality together, as we run out those with the most money and/or resources to trade for a dwindling non-rewneable energy source will survive better/longer than those without. Our current reality is however, we are seeing that level of dwindling at this time. One issue that is sure to come up within the next year or two is that of efficient generation, transport/delivery, and use of elecgrical energy within the United Sates and North America in general. Electricity is an important form of energy. We tend to generate it from hydro-electric dams, the burning of coal, and from nuclear power plants. Each of these have some negative environmental impacts. There are some alternative generation sources coming on line such as wind turbines and alternative fuel sources. Still, for as much as we currently generate, we actually lose large portions of it as it is transported along wires from the generation source to the end-user. A comparison would be if you had a pocketful of change but, there was a hole in your pocket. You put enough extra money in your pocket so that (hopefully) have enough to buy what you want at the store by the time you get there but, along the way you've lost a bunch of it. How much? You don't know unless you have a way to count it. All you know is that sometimes, when you get to the store, you don't have enough left in your pocket to meet your buying needs/wants. Let's assume you don't even have a way to count it before you leave for the store. Now, you could solve the problem by either spending the money to have the pocket sewn up, completely replacing the material that makes up the pocket, or even buying a new pair of pants if the pocket and surrounding material is in that bad of shape. We can call your pants pocket part of your spending infrastructure; something required to support your ability to get money to the store so that you can buy things there. Well, the wires, switches, connectors, and paths that electricity travels from its generation source to your electrical appliance are the infrastructure of electricity called the electrical gird. During times of heavy use, it has already had some well reported failures. One of the things that the new president, Obama has mentioned is spending Federal money on infrastructure. And, he has specifically mentioned the electrical grid so that we can use all/most/more of the electricity we are already generating. If we use more of the electricity we are already generating, then we will be more able to rely on the alternative generation sources. Most of the alternative generation sources we've come up with so far are more evironmentally friendly than the traditional sources we've been using. On the individual use level, using light bulbs and appliances that require less electricity to operate will also reduce the demand on the electricity generation sources as well.The term green is rather ill-defined. But, it means that you're doing something with less, minimal. or no negative environmental impact. In general, negative enviornmental impact translates into some type of waste, pollution, or contamination. Even within the generation, transport/delivery, and use of the traditional energy sources and alternative energy sources there are a number of improvements that can be done to make them all/most more green . Saving the polar bear is a good reason to make these things greener; for the polar bears themselves, the direct results of losing the polar, and everything else related to why we are losing the polar bears. But, a more direct and logical reason is that the negative environmental impacts in the generation, transport/delivery, and use of these energy sources are directly and negatively impacting our health too. Under our current systems, we are killing ourselves off too. It is not just the polar bear or climatic changes that are being affected. So, for those that do not see a correlation between our energy production and use systems, there is plenty of reason to become more green. It is ethical for our friends, family, community, country, and the world. It is logical in terms of self preservation. It is emotional when we and/or someone we know, care for, or love succums to a negative impact of living within our own waste, pollution, and contaminates.