Thermal power plants (TPPs):
Accident risk: relatively low, but there can be serious environmental consequences due to emissions of harmful substances.
Environmental impact:
emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon, hydrocarbons, aldehydes, and fly ash into the atmosphere;
consumption of huge volumes of oxygen;
environmental pollution during fuel extraction (e.g., oil spills, landscape changes due to open-pit coal mining);
contribution to the greenhouse effect and acid rain.
Technical and economic efficiency:
low capital costs compared to other types of power plants;
possibility of construction in any location;
cheap fuel (coal, fuel oil, gas);
high capacity and ability to quickly respond to changes in energy demand;
significant operating costs associated with fuel purchases and emission control;
relatively short service life and the need for regular equipment replacement.
Hydroelectric power plants (HPPs):
Accident risk: the risk of catastrophic floods in case of dam failure, especially in densely populated areas.
Environmental impact:
flooding of large areas, leading to loss of land resources and landscape changes;
destruction of ecosystems and species composition in the reservoir area;
obstacles to the migration of river inhabitants and the threat of extinction of some fish species;
decrease in the level of dissolved oxygen in the water, which can lead to the death of flora and fauna.
Technical and economic efficiency:
low operating costs after commissioning;
long service life with proper maintenance;
no fuel costs;
the possibility of using reservoirs for irrigation and recreation;
high capital costs for construction;
limitations in choosing a construction site.
Nuclear power plants (NPPs):
Accident risk: potential risk of serious technological disasters (e.g., the Chernobyl accident, the Fukushima accident).
Environmental impact:
the problem of storing radioactive waste, which retains its properties for hundreds of years;
the risk of radiation contamination in case of accidents;
emission of radioactive isotopes even during normal operation of the plant;
thermal pollution of the environment.
Technical and economic efficiency:
low cost of energy production in the long term;
independence from fluctuations in fossil fuel prices;
high capacity and stability of energy supply;
very high capital costs for construction and decommissioning of the plant after resource exhaustion;
the need for strict adherence to safety measures and control.
Alternative energy sources (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.):
Accident risk: relatively low, but there are specific risks (e.g., the possibility of earthquakes during geothermal source development).
Environmental impact:
minimal atmospheric pollution;
specific disadvantages:
solar power plants change the landscape and require large areas;
wind turbines can create noise and affect bird migration;
geothermal plants can pollute the soil and cause earthquakes.
Technical and economic efficiency:
inexhaustible energy sources;
low operating costs;
dependence on weather conditions and geographical location;
high capital costs for equipment installation;
currently limited capacity compared to traditional sources.
Conclusion: each type of energy source has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of accident risk, environmental impact, and technical and economic efficiency. The choice of the optimal energy source should take into account specific conditions (geographical location, resource availability, power needs, environmental requirements, and economic factors). To minimize negative environmental impacts, it is important to develop energy-saving technologies, improve energy production methods, and combine different types of power plants.