Nature 267, 111 - 117 (12 May 1977); doi:10.1038/267111a0

Economics of alternative energy sources

Martin Ryle^*

^*Cavendish Laboratory, Madingley Road, Cambridge, UK.

An important part of the oil and natural gas at present consumed in the UK is used for the heating of buildings, a demand which shows large diurnal, day-to-day and annual fluctuations. The replacement of this energy by nuclear-generated electricity, as at present envisaged, would require the construction of some 250 GW of additional capacity by the end of the century, a progamme which does not seem feasible. By incorporating relatively cheap, short term storage in the form of low-grade heat, the generating capacity required to fulfil peak demand could be reduced by more than 50%. As soon as such storage is provided, however, other sources of energy become viable and attractive alternatives, and the UK is well situated to make use of wind, wave, and tidal power. It seems likely that the value of North Sea oil/gas reserves as feedstock to the chemical industry will rise sufficiently to make an early reduction in their consumption as fuel of great economic importance.

References

1.	United Kingdom Energy Statistics 1973-75. (HMSO, London, 1976).
2.	Increased Costs of Energy; Implications for U.K. Industry. (NEDO, HMSO, London, 1974).
3.	Energy Conservation in the U.K. (NEDO, HMSO, London, 1975).
4.	Energy in the 1980s. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 276, 405 (1974).
5.	Energy Conservation: a Study of Energy Consumption in Buildings and Possible Means of Saving Energy in Housing, CP 56/75. (Building Research Establishment 1975).
6.	Lloyd, S. A. & Weinberg, F. J. Nature 257, 367 (1975).
7.	Solar Energy, a U.K. Assessment. (UK Section of ISES, London, 1976).
8.	Yellot, J. I. ASHRAE Journal, December 31 (1973).
9.	Wilson, E. M. Symposium on the Potential for Power from Currently Unconventional Energy Sources (Institute of Fuel, Southampton, in the press).
10.	New York Times 23 July (1976).
11.	Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Sixth Report; Nuclear Power and the Environment (HMSO, London, 1976).
12.	Sorensen, B. Science 194, 135 (1976).
13.	Operating Experience with Nuclear Power Stations in Member States in 1974. (International Atomic Energy Authority, Vienna, 1975).
14.	Power Plant Performance; Nuclear and Coal Capacity Factors and Economics. (Council on Economic Priorities, USA, 1976).
15.	Eldridge, F. R., Wind Machines (Report to the NSF, Mitre Corporation, USA, 1975).
16.	Golding, E. W. & Stodhart, A. H. The Potentialities of Wind-power for Electricity Generation, Report No. W/T16 (BEAIRA (now ERA), 1949).
17.	Molly, J. Proc. Int. Symp. Wind Energy Systems, Cambridge, UK (BHRA Fluid Engineering, Cranfield, in the press).
18.	Rayment, R. CP 59/76.(Building Research Establishment, 1976).
19.	Musgrove, P. New Scientist 72, 596 (1976).
20.	Coty, U. & Dubey, M. 2nd Ann. Energy Symp. (Los Angeles Council of Engineers and Scientists, Los Angeles, 1976).
21.	Ljungstrom, O. Proc. Int. Symp. Wind Energy Systems, Cambridge, UK (BHRA Fluid Engineering, Cranfield, in the press).
22.	Railly, J. W. New Scientist 73, 231 (1977).
23.	Wind-power Rep. Danish Academy Technical Sciences (1975).
24.	Wind Workshop 2 Proc. of the ERDA-N.S.F. Conf. Washington, (Mitre Corporation, 1975).
25.	Thomas, R. L. Proc. of the Vertical-axis Wind-turbine Workshop (E.R.D.A., Albuquerque, 1976).
26.	Templin, R. J. National Research Council of Canada Report LTR-LA-160 (1974).
27.	Glendenning, I. & Count, B. M. Proc. Symp. Renewable Sources of Energy R. Soc. Arts, p.50 (1977).
28.	U.K. Prov. Spec 10006/77.
29.	Merrick, D. Nature, 264, 596 (1976).