Del carbono a la energía eólica. Energías limpias, parte 2

Del carbono a la energía eólica. Energías limpias, parte 2


Hello again! in the first part of this
video we talk about the worst cataloged energies in environmental terms, for both
climate change and human health. We started talking
about biofuels, but and biodiesel was pending: We continue! Biodiesel derives in less sulfur oxides,
suspended particles, carbon monoxide and other hydrocarbons when burned, if we compare it
with conventional diesel. But biodiesel releases more nitrous oxide. On the most pleasant side of this list, we have
geothermal and hydroelectric power Geothermal plants have relatively less
environmental impact as you are not burning fuel to produce electricity though
it releases small amounts of CO2 and sulfur compounds. Neverheless, their emissions are much smaller than hydrocarbon fuel plants. Hydroelectric plants don’t pollute water or air, although they do
have environmental impacts because of their potential damage to fish and plant populations
by changing the temperature of the water and its flow, as well as forcing the relocation of people
and animals that were living in regions near the dike. Some species
as salmon should be taken care of so that they can continue to swim against the current to
spawn, so stairs can be placed for fish, but the location
of the plant can still modify the migration patterns of species. This plants can also
derive in a lower concentration of dissolved oxygen in water, which is harmful to
the habitat, and methane can accumulate as well, which you might recall is a dangerous greenhouse gas
as we discussed in the video about cows. Solar energy
Many of us believe that solar energy is the panacea since it does not pollute
air, water or produce greenhouse gases. Although it does have indirect effects on the
environment, for example during manufacturing of the photovoltaic cells that have waste byproducts of toxic materials. Ecosystems can also be affected
because generators may require cooling or cleaning, which can affect ecosystems
in dry climates. Also, an excess of solar cells in an inappropriate ecosystem, so
that solar exposure to plants is then limited, may result in detriment of
the environment. Nuclear energy
Nuclear power does not pollute the air and does not result in CO2 emissions that concern us
on the subject of climate change although of course that nuclear waste products are obtained:
the fuel used is highly radioactive and must be contained in especially
designed locations, as they said in the Simpsons: “we bury toxic waste where
no one can find them in thousands of years. ” When the plant is closed, much
of the equipment is considered contaminated with radiation and it will also be radioactive waste.
These wastes will remain radioactive for many thousands of years and the area won’t
be reused in the meantime. Nuclear plants use large quantities
of water and steam for cooling. Further, heavy metals and salts can accumulate
in the pipes of these plants, if this water is discharged as is, pollutants
may affect water quality and aquatic life I found something very interesting about nuclear energy in this NASA article
about the topic. It is a historical analysis of how many human losses are estimated derived
to the use of fossil fuels and it turns out that despite the three major nuclear disasters, the use of nuclear energy “saved” 1.8 million people, between 1971 and 2009. Come again?
I told you on my last video that there are many adverse health effects derived from using fossil fuels. So, the article compares how much more fossil fuel would’ve been needed if nuclear power didn’t exist and hadn’t generated that electricity. the conclusion is nuclear plants saved
1.8 million people in this process, also, the release of 64 gigatons of CO2 was avoided. We are in a bad place regarding the climate change issue of, but without
nuclear energy, we would be worse! In 2011 there were 440 nuclear plants
producing electricity worldwide Professor Derek Abbott wondered if we
could meet global needs with only nuclear plants. Short summary:
No, you can’t, and it seems to me that the he would prefer to bet on solar energy.
Although you can read his summary in the reference which I include in the description of the video. Wind
The wind is perhaps the cleanest source of energy, although during production
from the equipment itself, energy is needed that was not probably “clean energy” …
but hey, it doesn’t produce air or water pollution, and it does not consume any type of fuel
to generate electricity The most serious impact (and not a minor one)
of wind power is the mortality of birds and bats that eventually crash
against the turbines. This has inspired changes. in the turbine blade designs
so the birds don’t get stuck, and the area of the blades has increased so that the blades spin
slow enough to generate electricity, which also decreases the risks of
collision. Current forecasts made by experts like Bloomberg
indicate that costs and the market itself (supply and demand), will make us abandon coal and nuclear energy by in the US, and the main energy sources will be solar and wind since its costs
keep going down. In fact, I show you on screen which is
the cheapest energy source of this year, in several countries There is a possibility … one possibility …
of a different technology: nuclear fussion which in fact is a topic I talked about in one of
my first videos. Though the possibility that we reach
optimal technological development in a few years is low. From MY personal perspective, the climate emergency
lies in investing much more money in the development of science and technology
oriented to efficient energy processes. Not under a slogan of prohibiting “right now” an energy source that would collapse our productive system,
We must work aware that we are against
the clock in efficienting our sources of Energy. Or we do it today for good …
before the situation becomes harder… or we do it tomorrow when we
reach the climate crisis … or we just never do it… What do you think of this topic? If you like my
content and you think your friends or acquaintances might find it useful, support
this channel by sharing its content and subscribe. Remember to also click on the bell
so that YT will notify you when there are new videos. At the moment I am trying to publish regularly
on Sundays, so that you can join me even if you don’t get the notice. Thanks and see you soon!

8 thoughts on “Del carbono a la energía eólica. Energías limpias, parte 2

  1. También hay estudios desde ciencias sociales y también multidisciplinarias hablan sobre los problemas directos en comunidades de personas por la deficiente gestión al instalar las plantas de energía limpia en territorios indígenas o comunales. No son para nada problemas menores y es algo que también debe de trabajarse con cuidado. Pues, si es que necesitamos transitar a este tipo de energía, también necesitamos saber cómo hacer esa transición no solo energética, también social. Por cierto una vez más me han gustado mucho tus videos.

  2. Esperaba que fuera más largo el vídeo. Normalmente se hace referencia a EEUU para estadísticos, espero que se profundice más en Latinoamérica. Gracias, sigue así.

  3. Felicidades Cithia. Soberbio el video. Genial, genial. Estaría guay tener una comparativa de los costes de fabricación y contaminación de cada forma de energía.

    O sea realmente la energía solar y eólica sí que son la panacea, al menos actualmente, en cuanto a producción eléctrica no? tanto centrales de hidrocarburos como generadores eólicos contaminan en su fabricación pero la eólica no contamina cuando genera electricidad.

  4. Excelente vídeo Cinthia Reyes y un grandioso análisis de la energía nuclear y porque está retenida aunque no están tan peligrosa como se ha pintado y a la vez con serias limitaciones pero que es urgente reemplazar los combustibles fósiles, con lo que he leído por ahí los pronósticos y las investigaciones científicas se apuntan hacia una combinación de la nuclear y las energías renovables para hacerlas más sustentables y que permitan eliminar o filtrar el dióxido de carbono en la atmósfera y por la ecología a su vez con la combinación de hábitos y estilos de vida que sean amigables con el medio ambiente y por la distribución equitativa de los recursos naturales que es eso mismo un reto muy grande para el cambio climático y que conlleva a desafiar el modelo económico predominante

  5. En el canal de sígueme la corriente, nos platicaba el porque es complicado usar energía solar o eólica. Y es que el problema a veces no es generarla. El problema es que las ciudades en cierto momento usan más corriente (por ejemplo los lunes cuando todos recalientan la comida en el microondas) y en la actualidad solo quemas más Diesel o carbón en la planta eléctrica para suplir esa demanda. Cosa que no puedes hacer con el viento o el sol. Entonces una opción es que cada casa tenga una batería un power wall, pero eso dispararía el precio del litio y aparte no es tan ecológico

  6. Gracias por el vídeo Cinthia, 7:20 yo le tengo mucha fe a que proyectos como ITER salven la civilización con la tan anhelada Fusión nuclear

Leave a Reply

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