Nuclear fuel or coal seam gas?
In this work two different possible sources which can be used for electricity generation i.e., nuclear fuel and coal seam gas are compared. Starting with coal seam gas, technical, economical, environmental, and health related aspects of each source is discussed. Finally, a recommendation is made based on the ethical, environmental and economical assessment of each possible source of energy.
“Dewatering” is the main part of extracting CSG which means pumping out the water after drilling into coal seam. Dewatering is essential for reducing the pressure and letting gas to be pushed out. It is important to seal the drilling hole otherwise water and gas and other material can flow from coal seam to other aquifers. …show more content…
Therefore, before any action can be taken, communities social licence is also needed who are concerned about possible disastrous caused by leaking gas wells, and polluted water.
Gas-based electricity is planned to be expanded to be responsible for 50 percent of the domestic consumption by 2030 (ESAA 2011). However, as it is explained by Redmond and Haswell (2014) before further expansion more assessment is needed on different ways that GSC can influence people’s health by polluting water and soil, destroying agriculture and loss of water supply.
In terms of economy, as it is claimed by Department of Industry Innovation and Science (2015) the CSG development has shown positive outcomes and for instance, in Queensland has led to rise in employment, income, and government revenue.
Regarding the greenhouse has emission most studies have predicted that the level of greenhouse gas emission of CSG is around 15 to 50 percent less when compared to coal (CISERA …show more content…
Regarding the greenhouse gas emission it can be categorised at the same level as renewables. However, there are two main concerns: firstly, the safe wast disposals, and secondly, the possibility of melt core. The recent advances in design and engineering has shown that safe wast disposal for the period of 1 million years is possible and the possibility of melt core in new generation can be zero.
Going through the economical, environmental, and ethical issue surrounding the electricity generation by CSG and nuclear fuel , the nuclear fuel is recommended as the more ethical and environmentally friendly choice due to the following reasons:
1. When CSG is a novel industry and its its impacts on environment and people health is not properly assessed (Randall 2014), the nuclear technology is a matured, standardised, and well regulated industry (Sims et al. 2003; Chu & Majumdar 2012).
2. CGS needs a really large spatial distribution (Department of Industry Innovation and Science, 2015) and therefore, its negative consequences will affect a large number of people all over the Australia.
3. Nuclear power are much cleaner in terms of greenhouse gas emission, and its waste disposal and safety is already matured while the negative environmental impacts of CSG is not properly
In this work two different possible sources which can be used for electricity generation i.e., nuclear fuel and coal seam gas are compared. Starting with coal seam gas, technical, economical, environmental, and health related aspects of each source is discussed. Finally, a recommendation is made based on the ethical, environmental and economical assessment of each possible source of energy.
“Dewatering” is the main part of extracting CSG which means pumping out the water after drilling into coal seam. Dewatering is essential for reducing the pressure and letting gas to be pushed out. It is important to seal the drilling hole otherwise water and gas and other material can flow from coal seam to other aquifers. …show more content…
Therefore, before any action can be taken, communities social licence is also needed who are concerned about possible disastrous caused by leaking gas wells, and polluted water.
Gas-based electricity is planned to be expanded to be responsible for 50 percent of the domestic consumption by 2030 (ESAA 2011). However, as it is explained by Redmond and Haswell (2014) before further expansion more assessment is needed on different ways that GSC can influence people’s health by polluting water and soil, destroying agriculture and loss of water supply.
In terms of economy, as it is claimed by Department of Industry Innovation and Science (2015) the CSG development has shown positive outcomes and for instance, in Queensland has led to rise in employment, income, and government revenue.
Regarding the greenhouse has emission most studies have predicted that the level of greenhouse gas emission of CSG is around 15 to 50 percent less when compared to coal (CISERA …show more content…
Regarding the greenhouse gas emission it can be categorised at the same level as renewables. However, there are two main concerns: firstly, the safe wast disposals, and secondly, the possibility of melt core. The recent advances in design and engineering has shown that safe wast disposal for the period of 1 million years is possible and the possibility of melt core in new generation can be zero.
Going through the economical, environmental, and ethical issue surrounding the electricity generation by CSG and nuclear fuel , the nuclear fuel is recommended as the more ethical and environmentally friendly choice due to the following reasons:
1. When CSG is a novel industry and its its impacts on environment and people health is not properly assessed (Randall 2014), the nuclear technology is a matured, standardised, and well regulated industry (Sims et al. 2003; Chu & Majumdar 2012).
2. CGS needs a really large spatial distribution (Department of Industry Innovation and Science, 2015) and therefore, its negative consequences will affect a large number of people all over the Australia.
3. Nuclear power are much cleaner in terms of greenhouse gas emission, and its waste disposal and safety is already matured while the negative environmental impacts of CSG is not properly