blogs.experience.com — Wind, Solar, Hydrogen, Nuclear and more. As global demand for energy rises and the consequences of the current fossil fuel based system become apparent, we need to expand the current energy portfolio.
Dec 15, 2006 View in Crawl 4
rorrisonDec 16, 2006
@Kamill85Actually, any CO2 released from biofuels came from the atmophere, recently, so they're carbon neutral.The problems are that they are very inefficient (when you take into account the energy used producing them) and that if all the suitable crops grown in the US were used to produce biofuels, it still wouldn't meet the demand for gasoline (never mind the food shortage that would result).
wackiDec 16, 2006
This guy lists hydrogen as one of the top ten. That is very far from the truth:<a class="user" href="http://logicalscience.blogspot.com/2006/11/hydrogen-economy-no-backing-in-physics.html">http://logicalscience.blogspot.com/2006/11/hydrogen-economy-no-backing-in-physics.html</a>
derekjwDec 16, 2006
Nope, I think they are more interested in advancing us all, and to do that right now we need the energy from fossil fuels. The comment about the execs running off to an island was a joke.I might be a bit biased though as I work for a large oil company. I'm far away from management, but I don't think they are evil at all. But some others do.
waltcDec 16, 2006
Yes-- PVs seem to be largely ignored in lieu of larger and grander approaches these days. Of the medium term alternatives, I think that solar seemed to be one of the the stronger contenders. From DOE numbers, in 1980 PV systems cost $1/kwh. By 1990 the number had come down to about 40c/kwh. It's currently at 20c/kwh and by 2020, it should be 10c/kwh (roughly even with today's electricity costs). Even without subsidies, homes and many businesses could become energy neutral. Just think how that time frame might look if there *were* more subsidies.By the way, according to DOE's numbers wind power looks even more cost effective. So the same thing might be said to apply there-- those wind turbine things were kind of cool looking.
pseudoriousDec 16, 2006
I'm eating cow as quickly as I can!
kamill85Dec 17, 2006
@kokorhekkus: you're wrong, ammount of green plants do not increase, we can safely call it a constant in this equation. Biofuels produce same ammount of CO2 we used to create them, which means CONSTANT is not changed by using them, hence it's not a solution - we have too much CO2 in atmosphere RIGHT NOW. Now, if you make power source that do not produce CO2 AT ALL, then we can talk about decreasing level of it.
jcwinnieDec 17, 2006
I think more elaboration / clarification might help with the recommendation on geothermal. A good recommendation that got passed by in the Great Chicken v Cow Debate.Some people see geothermal and think "Hot Springs". It also means Ground Source Heat Pumps. Anyone building a home where there is a change of seasons should consider Passive Solar improvements first, then geothermal before high tech like solar cells. Lastly, I would have to agree about mis- (or dis?) information. Nuclear energy definitely is part of national energy policy for the U.S. and other first world countries. As a person who worked at a Nuclear Power Station, I have to side with those, who urge us to consider the many, many generations affected by the radioactive contamination so blithely advocated.
intangibleDec 19, 2006
Why isn't the Solar Updraft Tower included? <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower</a>
spootwoDec 19, 2006
There's more at stake then weather our cars have gas. Burning fuels is not good for my health, so it makes sense to stop pumping toxic chemicals into the air.When it comes to the environment most people usually forget one of these things:1) If something is even relatively harmful to my health then it's an environmental issue.2) Being environmental should save me money in the long run, and / or make life easier. (Not paying the hydro bill fits both. While shipping plastic off to india for recycling is both difficult and costly)Did I miss anything?
nkthenFeb 26, 2008
Solar energy is definitely a better solution for us.<a class="user" href="http://www.mysolarenergyathome.com">http://www.mysolarenergyathome.com</a>