Favorite power source

[williamthegreat]

Well I like Wind, Solar, Hydrogen - anything clean and safe - but I voted for other, just for fun (the other is something not yet designed that is probably just round the corner, fingers crossed!)

[CaptainPanic]

Surprising that wind power scores so low... is tha because it's 2nd choice for everyone after solar, or because people really oppose it?

 

For me, wind is a good 2nd option.

[Phi for All]

Surprising that wind power scores so low... is tha because it's 2nd choice for everyone after solar, or because people really oppose it?

 

For me, wind is a good 2nd option.

Wind has a big NIMBY objection with lots of folks, and I think that's why it scores lower. Maybe if they could make the turbines look like huge trees with lots of small fan blades that looked like leaves, people wouldn't mind having them on the horizon.

[Newbies_Kid]

I also voted for Nuclear power. But sea power (waves) also has potential.

[Phi for All]

It's too bad we can't turn the constant pressure of the deepest parts of the ocean into efficient energy. Wave power has the same ecological danger to marine inhabitants that wind power has for avians.

[neutrino]

Nuclear of course.

[Sisyphus]

It's too bad we can't turn the constant pressure of the deepest parts of the ocean into efficient energy. Wave power has the same ecological danger to marine inhabitants that wind power has for avians.

 

What kinds of wave power? Seems like all you would need is a floating object, with resistance to vertical movement powering a dynamo of some kind. That wouldn't be any mroe dangerous to marine life than any other floating object.

[Mr Skeptic]

Surprising that wind power scores so low... is tha because it's 2nd choice for everyone after solar, or because people really oppose it?

 

For me, wind is a good 2nd option.

 

Wind is one of the more economically effective renewable powers. Wind is a byword for unpredictability, which means few people would dare to rely on it (which might be slightly undeserved in certain locales). This would relegate it as only a partial solution. There's lots of noise about the turbines being noisy or ugly, though that need not be the case (but at the price of price).

 

Nuclear wins on the plain old incredible reliability and being a well-tested technology, despite being limited and having safety issues (safety against sabotage or nuclear proliferation; meltdown and waste are not much of an issue although they are made one). Also, case study: France.

 

Solar is the big winner: it is a cool tech like photosynthesis, it is seen as reasonably reliable (strength increasing till noon than decreasing, and then night), despite the dangers of weather blocking the sun. In hot climates it is ideal for airconditioning, which can be a big hog of electricity at just the times solar is best. Also, solar includes several technologies; solar heating of water and homes (won't produce but can save electricity), solar thermal, photovoltaics, and space solar. There's also natural photosynthesis and attempts at artificial photosynthesis. Space solar is extra nice as it can produce throughout the entire day. Solar is by far the most abundant energy, limited only by how many solar panels we can make, at least until we cover the entire solar system.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Mr Skeptic

[Newbies_Kid]

What kinds of wave power? Seems like all you would need is a floating object, with resistance to vertical movement powering a dynamo of some kind. That wouldn't be any mroe dangerous to marine life than any other floating object.

 

yeah a floating object or any option as long as it doesn't use a turbine blade. Some of wave power generators that looks safe for marine life are such the salter duck, "sea snake" and wave roller.