Letters

Letters From Our Readers

  • March/April 2009
  • By TR Readers
   

On The Grid
David Talbot's article on the power grid ("Lifeline for Renewable Power," January/February 2009) tells of the discontinuity between the present utility system and any future system that might depend on renewable sources of energy. The problem is that utilities are built to serve people where they live, while sun and wind are most plentiful where they don't.
May I offer an idea? In the 19th century, the United States managed to construct a vast and reliable rail system when the government granted huge concessions in real estate to railroad companies, which then proceeded to develop the miles of land on either side of the tracks they built. Today, the government owns vast tracts of inhospitable land, so why not do something similar to get energy grids out into those empty, windy, sunny regions? Give concessions to utilities to build nuclear plants, on the provision that they build large grids to collect power from the renewable sources that obtain there. The virtue of this idea is that it will be up to private markets to raise the funds and up to private companies to construct the hardware--usually a pretty efficient way to go.
Charles A. Berg
Former chief engineer
United States Federal Power Commission
Buckfield, ME

David Talbot's wide-ranging review of improvements needed for a better power grid was flawed by its failure to recognize the role of nuclear power, which is effectively dismissed as nonrenewable. Obviously, we can't require each and every power source to be indefinitely renewable--just clean, safe, cost-effective, and sustainable for a reasonable time. Safety concerns about nuclear power plants are often overstated, and waste issues are solvable with a combination of repository design, maintenance, and replacement planning. TR can play a role in educating nontechnical people about these issues, rather than assuming that nuclear power has no role to play in energy independence or atmospheric-­carbon control. By making this assumption, the ­article nibbles around the edges of the energy problem instead of contributing to a complete solution.
David Korenstein
Wayne, PA

 

To read the entire article you must log in:

Most of our content — all daily news, blogs, and videos — is free. Magazine stories are paid. To read this story, you must have a subscription or you must use a reading credit. Registration to Technology Review is free and entitles registrants to three free reading credits.

Username or REGISTER
Password  
   
 
Advertisement

MAGAZINE

Can We Build Tomorrow's Breakthroughs?

Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.

Videos

Meet 2011 TR35 Winner Jesse Robbins

More

Advertisement

Technology Review Lists

TR50

Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:

Toyota

Layar

Complete Genomics

Amyris

More

Advertisement
Advertisement