There is a debate about whether to allow a new Uranium mine in the county to the east of where we live. This mine would access Uranium that is currently suspended in ground water. Industry representatives propose that the best way to access the Uranium is through in-situ mining, a process through which oxygenated water would be injected into the mine and out would come uranium ore and water. This description is simplistic, but it gives you the basic idea. The company that wants to build the mine claims that the process is perfectly harmless and will not result in contaminating the aquifer that neighbors the proposed mine. Critics of the mine are concerned that a mistake or unforeseen factors could result in the contamination of the aquifer and thus ruin the water supply for millions of people and thousands of farms on the eastern Colorado plains and into Nebraska and Oklahoma.

Why do they want to mine Uranium? Nuclear Power. We hear a lot in the news about the need for clean energy development, which most people associate with Wind and Solar power; however, many people still believe that Nuclear Power is an efficient and clean energy source. Meanwhile, the energy consumption of the United States continues to grow at a rapid pace and at present we barely meet our needs for power. This is why numerous coal fired plants are on drawing boards (or under construction) all around the nation. And although it may not hit the news headlines, many communities are considering construction of new nuclear power plants, which has resulted in a 2000% jump in the price of Uranium (you read that right) from 2000 to 2007.

One reason that some people support nuclear power is that at this time neither wind nor solar power provides a consistently reliable source of power. The power provided by wind (and solar) is considered intermittent, which is why it is so cool that Spain recently set a new record for consuming the largest portion of generated wind power — just over 40% of all power consumed — this past Saturday (via Metaefficient). The intermittent nature of wind, poses a challenge for those making and using wind power (this challenge is one excuse for charging “wind” customers a surcharge), because it is difficult to project how much power will come from wind and how much power will need to come from other sources (for example hydro or coal power). Xcel Energy in Colorado works with an economist to try and balance the demand for energy with the amount of energy produced by different methods. In the case of Spain, the country experienced a long period of sustained high winds allowing for more power to be generated by windmills which was available for immediate consumption by customers.

So, wind power presents a challenge, because it is intermittent. The solution out to be easy — just store the power generated and save it for later, right? Unfortunately, at this time power companies do not have an effective method for storing excess energy, and so unlike loads of coal or reservoirs full of water that can be budgeted ahead of time, energy from wind power is only available at the mercy of the wind. No wind = no power. Lots of wind = lots of power. In order for power companies to take full advantage of the environmental benefits of wind power they need to be able to predict how much energy to make through a traditional source, such as coal power, and hope that the rest of the power will indeed be supplied by wind; hence, the significance of the wind-to-battery project that Xcel has recently started in Minnesota. Hopefully, the wind-to-battery project will be a huge success and help to reduce our nation’s (and China’s, and the rest of the world’s) dependence on coal. Even better would be to eliminate the need for any new fossil fuel based power plants or new nuclear power plants!

We all know that despite advances in technology, coal is a very dirty fuel. And, most of us understand that a functioning and well maintained nuclear power plant is a very clean form of energy (and supposedly safe). However, the risks associated with the mining and disposal of uranium, and the possibility of a nuclear disaster, are really too high for me to get excited (in a good way) about nuclear power. And, a waste product that sits around for millennium is not very “clean” in my book. Personally, I find the notation of wind and solar power to be not only cost effective, but also one more way to be aware of our connection to life on earth. Outside my window there is currently a strong breeze and sunny skies, what better way to make energy than to take advantage of the gift of nature?

Come back tomorrow for an excellent guest post by my friend Matt who is a huge fan of personal solar power (for your home). And, for more on what the US is doing to harness the energy of the wind visit the Department of Energy.