Reply #58: It seems that we have two sides to Distributed energy resource

[bluedawg12]

According to Nnadir's DailyKos article, "Distributed energy is not proved to be better than centralized energy. Five million small coal fires in China are not superior to one large nuclear plant! (Yes, small wildcast coal systems are distributed power.)
Cars are not superior to mass transit in trains."

Hence the argument for centralized source of energy like a nuclear plant.

The wiki article states:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_generation

"Distributed energy resource (DER) systems are small-scale power generation technologies (typically in the range of 3 kW to 10,000 kW) used to provide an alternative to or an enhancement of the traditional electric power system.

The usual problem with distributed generators are their high costs.

The one exception is probably microhydropower. A well-designed plant has nearly zero maintenance costs per kWh, and generates useful power for many years."

The other issue NNadir mentioned in the DK article is the disposal of the inevitable waste from from say a coal based DER.

On the other hand, that would not be a hurdle for solar.

Well, except that NNadir states:
" All forms of energy have a waste problem. All have a profile for danger."

I wish we had a table or diagram, or some way to compare the pro's and cons of different types of energy and distribution.

This topic of energy to supply the US and the world requiries more than casual expetice or opinion from intersted citizens- it's expertice intensive.

We need a grand unified theory of energy--hey- isn't that what the governm....uh!...oh never mind...geez.