« Back to Home Page

Sign up for the 3p daily dispatch:

The Fort Collins Dilemma: Nuclear or Solar?

Shannon Arvizu | Thursday November 29th, 2007 | 5 Comments

Solar_two.jpg
The New York Times reported today an intriguing article on what’s happening in Fort Collins, Colorado – a city that prides itself on being a bastion of green living. The town’s motto, “Where renewal is a way of life,” is more than just a metaphor. The city is heavily involved in promoting carbon-free energy production. They currently have two proposals on the table – an innovative solar panel production plant and a uranium mining project for nuclear power. Although the energy that wil be generated from each project will be carbon-free, the processes of production and/or extraction each have their own environmental hazards. Should the town support nuclear, solar, or both? And what about the NIMBY factor? Should the town expose itself to possible health hazards for the sake of local job creation and global carbon-free energy production?


This case is an interesting example of the type of decisions that those of us in the sustainable business field have to consider. At first, it may seem like a no-brainer. Fort Collins should support the solar panel production and veto the uranium mining. But, the type of solar panel production that they are considering necessitates the use of cadmium, which could enter the waterways and is linked to cancer. In addition, the amount of clean energy that could be produced from the panels is probably not as much the amount that could be generated from the uranium. Mining uranium, however, has its own host of problems. The plan involves using “in-situ mining,” an experimental process developed in the 1950s that injects chemicals into the ground to release the uranium and is pumped to the surface. So…what to do?
I think both options are a bust. Both would bring in local revenue and produce carbon-free energy, but both represent outmoded forms of technology. What about applying cradle-to-cradle principles to energy? Instead of solar panel production, why not, for example, solar thermal production? Harness the sun’s energy directly using mirrors and direct the heat to create steam to power energy turbines. The picture for this article is an example of one such plant in operation in the Mojave desert.
Fort Collins shouldn’t have to sacrifice their principles, or their health, to make their motto a reality. Residents of this progressive town should consider new ways of eco-efficient technology for their energy needs.
Shannon Arvizu is completing her Ph.D. dissertation, “Corporate Responses to Climate Change: The Institutionalization of Carbon Measuring, Reducing, and Offsetting,” at Columbia University. She also works as a sustainablity consultant and a documentary filmmaker. You can reach her at sla2113@columbia.edu.


▼▼▼      5 Comments     ▼▼▼

Newsletter Signup
  • Nick Aster

    Great post Shannon. I’m not a huge fan of Solar thermal because of the massive amount of land it takes up, but I think you’re on target with regards to the solution being “none of the above”… I think efficiency is far more important (and better for the economy) than anything else. Provide simpe incentives for better insulated homes and CFLs, heck even pay for the CFLs, and you’ll spend a lot less money than building a new powerplant and avoid the need to build one at the same time.

  • Paul Smith

    Shannon, you may want to change how you have your email in the bio at the end, to have {at} and {dot} or some such text, because spambots scour for addresses given online like this…

  • Nancy Freeman

    Sharon–you have not completed your research. Uranium mining leaves a huge carbon footprint. The processing and enhancing use fossil fuels–and what about trucking the waste to Nevada???

  • Mohamed Emm Abdou

    how can i get ur Solar cells here in Egypt ?
    and if u don’t get a representitives here in Egypt how can be one for u ?
    tank you for ur help and waiting badly for ur answering !!!

  • Anonymous

    I believe the reason for grid tie photo voltaic solar panels would be to reduce the demand for future coal and nuclear power plants. Lets face if every house han one panel it could reduce the overall demand by approximately one tenth ,therefore, elliminating the need for big money to harness and sell more energy. In my opinion Ft Collins should not support nuclear energy!