Exploration

The ingenuity of man has reached phenomenal heights and yet has a vast expanse of unexplored potential. The discovery of fossil fuel as a viable source of energy was just such an example of a fantastic achievement reached by mankind. But the question is this: do we stop searching for better and more efficient sources of energy just because we already have one good option? Our answer is this: of course not. The Earth has an enormous amount of untapped resources and mankind the intelligence to develop these resources into feasible energy solutions.

Utah is a state dedicated to the business man and committed to the ideals of capitalism embraced by the Founding Fathers of this country. What we are putting forth is that the exploration and use of alternative energy sources can actually thrive in a capitalistic economy and can serve as an economic stimulator. We will investigate several different energy source options, examining the economic impacts of incorporating each option into a liberal market and the questions that discussion of such an action raises, while arguing that such options are economically stable and beneficial to natives of Utah, American citizens and residents of this great planet.

Nuclear Power

The term ‘nuclear’ has developed a particularly negative connotation due to events surrounding WWII and the Cold War. And, more specifically, ‘nuclear power’ generates a negative reaction in public thought because of events such as the explosion in Chernobyl. When people think of nuclear, they think of mass destruction, radiation sickness, and general awfulness. Many are prone to completely ignore the option of nuclear power as a solution to our energy problem simply based on the negative connotations that the term ‘nuclear’ has acquired, while they don’t consider the many advantages, including economic ones, that are to be had in such a resource. What many don’t understand about nuclear power is that as technology advances, safety advances. At the time of the horrific events in Chernobyl, nuclear power was still relatively new and the methods used were still relatively primitive. Since this awful disaster, safety procedures have increased while organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have become much more proactive in promoting safer and more secure nuclear power plants. When working with energy producing machinery, there is always a risk factor to be considered, but there will always be risk factors in the development of any new technology power source.

Many people believe that building nuclear power plants would be economically pointless if they are not safe enough to last without causing mass destruction, destruction that would cost even more to repair. But in reality, nuclear power plants exercise enough safety precautions that they are no more likely to cause a disaster than any other power plant. One incident in which safety precautions were not taken and regulated procedures not followed, is not enough to form a permanent bias against nuclear energy on. As Grigory Medvedev puts describes, “Chernobyl demonstrated the ignominious failure and the sheer insanity of the administrative-command system” (x). It was not the technology that created the disaster in the case of Chernobyl, but the failure of the communist Soviet Union.

Another major concern leveled against nuclear power is that creating such facilities would be too expensive and would require significant government subsidies and support. For many native Utahans this means greater government control which many view as damaging for the economy and infringing on rights that we have to live and trade in a free market. But research has been done to show that such concerns are ill-founded. According to the World Nuclear Association, “nuclear power has now become less expensive than fossil and any other form of electricity generation” (http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/economics.pdf). The WNA asserts that initial financing costs are decreasing as standardized designs are being developed and that operating costs are continually lowering as capacity factors of plants have steadily increased with further optimization of the technology used in nuclear power plants (http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/economics.pdf).

Nuclear power has clearly become a safe and economically sound option for energy. With the added benefit of producing negligible amounts of green house gas emissions, nuclear power plants should be considered as a viable source of energy to be capitalized. “New nuclear plants are robust, secure long-term investments as part of a portfolio of environmentally sound technologies that make the world less dependent on damaging carbon emissions” (http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/economics.pdf).

Hydropower

Hydropower has been utilized for centuries, powering such things as watermills, textile machines and cranes. “Hydropower is based on water driving the turbines. The primary energy is provided by gravity and the height the water falls down on to the turbine” (Forsund, 2-3). The primary benefit of hydropower is that it obviously emits absolutely no greenhouse gases in the generation process. It relies solely on natural processes, simply utilizing the potential kinetic energy produced by gravity. Now, how is this economically beneficial? One of the great advantages of hydropower is that no mining or drilling is required. This can cut costs of production down, eliminating one step in the process of generating electricity that is necessary for methods such as nuclear power or coal generators.

Some people may argue that the elimination of this step in production is actually bad for the economy in that it also eliminates jobs. In our current economic downturn, this is a very valid concern as unemployment rates keep rising. But in reality, using hydropower to supplement current energy sources can only add jobs to the market. By creating another industry niche, it is creating more opportunity for economic growth. We are not proposing completely eliminating the mining industry, but rather we are suggesting adding another market option and thus adding job opportunities in a more economically efficient system. With this lower cost of production, adding significant hydropower sources will help lower the costs of energy for the consumer. It will accomplish this by offering more competitive prices to the energy market, forcing fossil fuel based providers to lower their prices at the benefit of the consumer. This lowering of prices will provide affordable power to urban areas, promoting population growth and economic development in diverse businesses. In Utah specifically, cheaper power to operate businesses such as hospitals, offices and warehouses in the hot summer months can only boost operating capital of these businesses as their cooling bills are lowered, leaving them with more money to use elsewhere, circulating economic movement.

In addition to the benefits seen in the electrical industry, the agricultural industry will see many benefits from the use of hydropower. In the example afforded by the Hoover Dam, we have already seen many agricultural users that benefited by the controlling of the Colorado River and the water transported to them by the dam for the irrigation of their farms (http://www.usbr.gov/history/hoover.html). As in the case of the Hoover Dam, additional hydropower plants can offer the chance to manage water flow and optimize growing potential in dry areas which would naturally be difficult to farm, thus creating more potential cropland. This increase in viable cropland will only lead to the creation of more jobs and more food and capital circulation. Hydropower has such incredible economic potential with the added benefit of being one of the cleanest processes currently available for the generation of electricity.

Biofuels

“The term bio-fuel is referred to as liquid or gaseous fuels for the transport sector that are predominantly produced from biomass” (Demirbas, 1). The biomass referred to is created from foodstocks such as corn or sugarcane that are grown in general cropland. The advantage to such a source of energy is the renewable nature of this source. New crops are grown every year, with the lifecycle continuing on regardless of how much of the energy source has already been used.

One argument frequently levied against the use of biofuels to supplement our energy consumption is that it is taking food away from the poor and starving people of the world. But what we ask in reply to this criticism, is if the people are starving, then why isn’t the land already being used to help feed them? People are starving throughout the world, not because of a lack of natural resources, but because of personal situations and limitations. People aren’t being nourished, not because they don’t have food but because they can’t afford food. Claiming that the use of biofuels will take food from the mouths of the hungry is simply ludicrous. We live in a country that thrives on capitalism and capitalism thrives on the competition of those participating. Those that find themselves without the necessities to live cannot blame their pitiable situation on a lack of natural resources. Their situation is simply the outcome of their effort in industry. If we are so concerned with feeding the hungry then we need to fork over the capital required to support them, not the land or natural resources, because they are ready and available. The incorporation of biofeuls into our energy solution will simply create more job opportunities and more market opportunity for farmers and in effect, stimulating the economy.

It is also worth considering the combination of hydropower and biofuels. The construction of dams serves to control water routes and can lead to the development of more viable cropland because of the availability of water in dryer climates. This increase of potential farmland can be utilized by allocating it to the production of crops specifically for biofuels. If managed properly, biofuels can be an economically beneficial supplement to our energy solution.

Wind Power

Some may argue against wind power as a viable source of energy for purely cosmetic reasons concerning the wind turbines themselves: they are too ugly, they are too loud, they are too big. People complain that the ungainly windmills are blight upon the open fields and grasslands of the great United States, lowering property values and wasting workable land. But are they really that unseemly juxtaposed with a power plant run on coal? Are the clean, sharp designs of the rotating blades really that ugly next to the blackened towers emitting plumes of smoke? Do they really take up more space than the acres required for coal or nuclear power plants that not only require production space, but also mining and drilling space? Is the noise really greater than that produced in any other major production facility? Of course not.

Spanish Fork, Utah, offered an interesting resolution to these complaints, however superficial they may be. The wind farm built in the Spanish Fork Canyon is built on what used to be a gravel pit and land that is now considered unfit for residential or commercial use. These turbines were placed at the mouth of the canyon, generating power 80% of each day (http://www.wasatchwind.com/sfwp.html). The people of Utah have already found a way to use unsuitable land and make it profitable to the community. The land that was already an eyesore now sports the technologies of man, while being utilized to power homes and businesses. This sort of optimization of resources is what conserving energy and saving money is all about.

Just a Thought

We are all on this marvelous planet that offers so much potential for energy sources. We have the capability and the technology to explore the options for energy solutions around us. Through this exploration we will be able to expand the energy market, making it more diverse and competitive. This competition will lead to larger industries, lower prices and more options for the consumer which will help stimulate the economy and benefit all involved. Humans have never been ones to sit by and let opportunities for advancement pass them by. We must continue to stretch ourselves, ever striving to improve our human condition—socially, economically, technologically. It has been shown over the centuries that as new advances are made, new industries are born and the economy is expanded. Alternative energy sources will not be an exception to this historical trend.