Why is Georgia's main energy sources coal and nuclear?
409013
Lets see, hmmm, the mountains block our wind mills; it's cloudy more often than sunny so there goes solar being workible, and god forbid u build a dam on a river, what else do u suggest?
460294
Depends on what for.  Nuclear fission is great for generating electricity.  Biodiesel has lots of promise as a motor vehicle fuel (not to mention would be great for the US Agriculture industry).  Solar power can greatly reduce the amount of power individual homeowners have to purchase from larger providers (but the initial investemnt is expensive).  Probably a combination of Fossil Fuel alternatives would be better than adopting a single alternative replacement.
228704
try looking up "nuclear" energy..you will find more info i am sure.
456474
Typical coal power generator-\nCoal is burnt producing heat\nHeat is transferred to water to form steam\nSteam, on its way to cooling back to water, runs across a giant fan called a turbine \nThe turbine turns an electric generator thus making electricity
1020736
Coal power plants release more radiation than nuclear power plants (because of Carbon-14, and the fact that they do not include shielding for radiation).  So, replacing coal burning plants with nuclear plants would be better for humanity.
70676
Natural gas is a very good source for energy, but it is non-renewable with our current technology. \n\nHydro-electric is a viable energy source for electricty. It will always be available unless the water cycle ends.\n\nCoal is a good source for heat and power, but it does have some polluting characteristics in its natural state.\n\nNuclear is good for electricity production, steam generation and heat (from steam), it does leave residual waste, that is more concentrated radioactivity than what occurs naturally.\n\nFuel cells require power to produce but they work very well. They use readily available materials and can be scaled to the power output that is needed.\n\nGeothermal is good for heating houses and on a large scale in some areas for producing electricity. It is also a renewable power source.\n\nWind and solar are two more options that are becoming readily available for the end user. They are generally coupled with a battery system for calm periods of weather and night time.
543562
I don't know that much about Georgia except that the women look beautiful in pictures, the people seem to live longer than normal and Stalin was from there.  Tell me more.
639462
Poor regions tend to burn quite a lot of coal for heating and manufacturing.  Green technologies are simply too expensive too expensive for most people in these areas.  Combine that with governmental turmoil in many areas, and you have no resources to tackle the problem.
1144389
Energy, Transportation, Petrochemical and Security.\n\nfor obvious reasons
479783
If you mean the country of Georgia:\nEnvironmental Issues: air pollution, particularly in Rust'avi; heavy pollution of Mtkvari River and the Black Sea; inadequate supplies of potable water; soil pollution from toxic chemicals.\n\nGeographical: Largely mountainous, but it does have a border with the Black Sea.
278635
Since we get more than half of our electricity from coal, that's an unlikely goal.  We are trying to find ways of burning coal more cleanly.\n\nNuclear power is a clean alternative to coal, but fears of a disaster have prevented any nuclear power plant from being built in the US for many years.
387468
They extract the heat from the nuclear reaction instead of burning fuel.\nThey don't have emissions.\nThey have higher safety and security measures.
401394
lets start with advantages.......\n   for power generation\n   alternate to non-renewable energy sources\n   \ndisadvantages....\n  expensive\n  harmful to environment(radiation)\n  risky\n\nenergy is produced in nuclear reactor by fission mechanism......
321037
Almost all power plants use some heat source (coal, natural gas, nuclear pile, geothermal heat, concentrated sun rays) to generate steam. The steam turns turbines. The turbines turn generators.\nGenerators generate electricity which is where electromagnetism comes in. A simple model is this: when you move a magnet around a wire you see a current induced in the wire. Now a generator moves a whole bunch of coils of wire around magnets (or moves magnets inside lots of coils of wire) and thus uses electromagnetism to generate electricity.
488083
Specify wich Georgia.
142694
Advantages:\n\nFuel is cheap. Unlike other types of electricity generation only a tiny proportion of the cost of generating nuclear power is in the actual fuel burned. \n\n\nFuel is very easy and cheap to transport. A coal or gas power station will burn tonnes of fuel every day. A nuclear power station will burn only a few grams. Because so little fuel need sot trannsported the amount of auilliary grenhouse gas pollution form transport is almost nil, as opposed to thousands of tonnes a year from coal or gas transport.\n\nSafe. Coal or gas power is a highly dangerous way to generate gas. In the US alone dozens of people are killed each year mining and transporting coal and gas for power generation and hundreds more die as a result of the pollutants these stations produce. If the same amount of power were generated using nuclear stations fewer than 10 people would die. \n\nAccidents in nuclear power generation is also far less likely to result in a loss of life. Chernobyl was the worst accident ever in the history of nuclear power generation and killed less than 50 people. There have been numerus mine accidents in the US that have killed more than 10 people at a time.\n\nUnder safety I will also include the very low levels of radioactivity released. In the US alone around 10 people a years are killed by radioactive materials released by coal power stations. Nobody in the US has ever been killed by radioactive material from nuclear power stations. Fewer than 100 people have been killed by the radioactive material released by nuclear power stations in the last 50 years in the entire world. \n\n\nNon-polluting. Aside from making nuclear power generation very safe the almost total lack of unintentional pollutants is a major environmental bonus for nuclear power. Nuclear power stations contribute just 1/100, 000th of the amount of greenhouse gas as a coal or gas plant generating the same power.\n \nAbundant fuel. The world has about enough liquid rude oil to practically last about another 100 years at current consumption and extraction rates. Coal will see us through another 400 years if we sue it as an oil supplement. We have sufficient fissionable material available to provide 10, 000 years of nuclear power even if we abandon coal and oil altogether and get ALL our energy from nuclear power.\n\n\nDisadvantages\n\nWaste disposal. This is the biggest problem. Nuclear power plants produce radioactive material that takes thousands of years or longer to become safe. Until it does decay to a safe level it has to be stored where it can’t contaminate the water supply or stolen by people who want to use it as a poison. That requires either the construction of expensive containment facilities or the permanent lockdown of decommissioned stations so the material can be stored on site.\n\nStations are relatively expensive to build. Due to pressure from environmental lobby groups nuclear power stations are more heavily regulated than any other industry, far more heavily regulated than coal power stations or even coal mines and far more heavily indicated than the statistical danger warrants. IN addition any proposed nuclear power station will be the target of protests, endless legal challenges and direct acts of sabotage from ‘environmentalists’. Those factors make it far more expensive to build a nuclear power station in the US than to build a coal or gas station.\n\nPortability. Nuclear power requires nuclear reactors, big nuclear reactors. That means they are restricted to use in large ocean going vessels, trains and as stationary electrical generators. You can’t use nuclear power to directly power cars, trucks, and airplanes. That means that nuclear power can never directly replace a large amount of US fossil fuel use. The issue of portability can be offset somewhat by using nuclear electricity to convert plant material or even air and water into petroleum, but doings o is fairly expensive.
411815
No.If there was we would use nuclear energy.It is not and never was a workable energy source because of the hazards and waste.