Reply To: T-shirt designers unite and take over

[Rematog]

All of the recent discussion has left the original topic NIMBY vs Decentralized Generation.

I’ve not been convenienced by any of the arguements made that FF deployment would be Decentralized in the near to middle term. Yes, I agree that in theory it would be more effienct and safe enought to use in urban areas.

BUT…. if the cost of power generation has dropped 10 fold, what would be the huge push to site them in urban areas (the added cost savings for tranmission would be insignificant compared to the savings in generation costs due to FF). Certainly the technology would be RELATIVELY quickly sited near urban areas (roughly 20-50 miles from down town). I define relatively as after most fossil fuel and fission central stations have been re-powered with FF modules. The second phase of deployment would be smaller (100 to 1000 MW) new FF “complexes” located at transmission access points just outside of urban areas. This would supply the rapid load growth caused by cheaper power (Edison’s revenge, the compact floresent bulb would go the way of the Dodo).

Note, land use alone would push this. A FF complex of from 20-200 FF modules (100 to 1000MW @ 5 MW/Module) would require from 10 to 100 acres @2 mod/ acre avg. density. Remember, that land requirement includes maintenance/office buidlings, cooling tower (316b will prevent open cycle cooling), roads, power and piping chases, etc. If containment is still required, the land use goes up. There would be some economy of scale in land use, bigger complexes would likely have a little greater average density (mods/acre).

No, I think the NIMBY’s will control the game for the first and second phases of deployment. 30 years or so after initial deployment, FF modules may become accepted enough to site at a shopping mall, but not right away.

REMATOG