26-03-2009 11:29:07
Most of the power plant around the globe use coal, natural gas and petroleum as the main fuel. Alternative power source such as solar, geo-thermal, bio-mass, nuclear and wind are frankly speaking in the stages of development. As stated in the law of physics, energy cannot be created or destroyed. Thay can only be change into various forms. By using renewable energy, we are trying to reduce the energy loss during the transformation.
26-03-2009 11:45:51
26-03-2009 12:25:36
Nuclear power for me... Solar power currently takes up too much space and takes in very little energy from sunlight (hope there's better technology coming up)
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »
26-03-2009 20:27:08
If the solar panel are deploy in space then the efficiency may increase by folds. Nuclear are clean but still the radioactive sources are scarce. Still maybe we should consider geotherma.
27-03-2009 06:54:15
Good ideas from eeu, but i think in the near future we may not need to use neither of what u guys mentioned.
I believe a new form of green technology is making its way into the world of energy.
Green energy, harnessing the energy from plants itself.
Heard of it? Much more efficient, space conscious and effective.
Dun ask me where are my sources, i just read about them somewhere. So i dun realli remember.
Just heed me, there are always more way to get energy.
I believe a new form of green technology is making its way into the world of energy.
Green energy, harnessing the energy from plants itself.
Heard of it? Much more efficient, space conscious and effective.
Dun ask me where are my sources, i just read about them somewhere. So i dun realli remember.
Just heed me, there are always more way to get energy.
27-03-2009 14:16:00
Harnessing the energy from plants itself? You meant bio-fuels? If u're refering to it, it's quite a topic that's been argued
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »
27-03-2009 19:31:06
seems like the most feasible way is the one i mention before, bio-mass. Harvesting energy from rotten plants, then burn the fume (methane) and wala, we get the power. It's cheap but the fume is deadly and the storage container are expensive.
27-03-2009 19:49:24
27-03-2009 20:01:36
nuckear power, used carefully and taking every necessary measure to prevent accidents, would be the best solution to our energy problems !!
27-03-2009 20:22:12
nuckear power, used carefully and taking every necessary measure to prevent accidents, would be the best solution to our energy problems !!
Once again, agree... People thinks that nuclear plants may easily leak out harmful radiation but it's not true nowadays... It is regulated strictly... things like Three Mile Island/Chernobyl happened because they didn't do things carefully...
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »
28-03-2009 08:10:37
28-03-2009 09:57:14
28-03-2009 10:04:33
28-03-2009 11:45:58
i just realise that i left out one kind of alternative energy source. Generally known as tidal energy. Harvest the tidal energy from the sea.
28-03-2009 14:37:05
Hmm...science place, look like i go in wrong way...
28-03-2009 16:52:31
28-03-2009 19:52:02
Guess we can just stick to nuclear for now.
But 1 fact is that, nuclear waste is hard to dispose of.
It may takes thousands of years to disintegrate/decompose.
Think twice about using it!!!
But 1 fact is that, nuclear waste is hard to dispose of.
It may takes thousands of years to disintegrate/decompose.
Think twice about using it!!!
The nuclear waste is very little as compared to the waste from coal fired plants (greenhouse gases, dust and soot), especially with a new technology IFR (Integral Fast Reactor) which recycle the used fuel to get more plutonium out of it to "burn" it to generate electricity...
seems like the most feasible way is the one i mention before, bio-mass. Harvesting energy from rotten plants, then burn the fume (methane) and wala, we get the power. It's cheap but the fume is deadly and the storage container are expensive.
It's a good energy source but methane from the rotten plant/animals are generated quite slowly over time and it's kind of hard to really get a lot of methane to power our lifes...
i just realise that i left out one kind of alternative energy source. Generally known as tidal energy. Harvest the tidal energy from the sea.
Yes.. it's a good idea but there's also a disadvantage that is it limited to generate a small amount of electricity
(i not picking on you guys ideas but just weighting out the advantage and disadantage.. please understand)
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »
30-03-2009 15:54:16
30-03-2009 21:08:07
I believe that most likely france get most of it's electricity from oil power plants
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »
31-03-2009 06:44:14
One point I think that is not very feasible with biofuel is that, we are barely growing enough food to satisfy the over-populated world, and with a lot of arable lands deteriorating due to mismanagement, do you think we can still grow fuel to be burnt by fuel guzzling machinery? Even the biomass energy is not applicable to every place and with the current demand, the insignificant amount produced could barely put a dent in the astronomical amount required. At most, biological sources, as well as the other, such as solar, wind, hydro etc. can only be counted as a supplement... not total replacement.
Nuclear power is still the best. It produces whole lot of energy with little materials, plus the waste makes superb weapons of mass destruction too, which may come in handy when the world superpowers finally decide to eliminate some surplus populations to ease competition for resources ne. Just can't beat that can you...lol.
Of course if there ever existed something like the GN Drives, it would be much better ne, since the pixie dust can be used not only to generate energy but also to cure diseases and re-animate dead bodies...
Nuclear power is still the best. It produces whole lot of energy with little materials, plus the waste makes superb weapons of mass destruction too, which may come in handy when the world superpowers finally decide to eliminate some surplus populations to ease competition for resources ne. Just can't beat that can you...lol.
Of course if there ever existed something like the GN Drives, it would be much better ne, since the pixie dust can be used not only to generate energy but also to cure diseases and re-animate dead bodies...
"Enlightenment is finding that there is nothing to find. Enlightenment is to come to know that there is nowhere to go. Enlightenment is the understanding that this is all, that this is perfect, that this is it." ~ Osho
31-03-2009 10:11:43
One point I think that is not very feasible with biofuel is that, we are barely growing enough food to satisfy the over-populated world, and with a lot of arable lands deteriorating due to mismanagement, do you think we can still grow fuel to be burnt by fuel guzzling machinery? Even the biomass energy is not applicable to every place and with the current demand, the insignificant amount produced could barely put a dent in the astronomical amount required. At most, biological sources, as well as the other, such as solar, wind, hydro etc. can only be counted as a supplement... not total replacement.
Nuclear power is still the best. It produces whole lot of energy with little materials, plus the waste makes superb weapons of mass destruction too, which may come in handy when the world superpowers finally decide to eliminate some surplus populations to ease competition for resources ne. Just can't beat that can you...lol.
Of course if there ever existed something like the GN Drives, it would be much better ne, since the pixie dust can be used not only to generate energy but also to cure diseases and re-animate dead bodies...
Nuclear power is still the best. It produces whole lot of energy with little materials, plus the waste makes superb weapons of mass destruction too, which may come in handy when the world superpowers finally decide to eliminate some surplus populations to ease competition for resources ne. Just can't beat that can you...lol.
Of course if there ever existed something like the GN Drives, it would be much better ne, since the pixie dust can be used not only to generate energy but also to cure diseases and re-animate dead bodies...
I agree with you first paragraph, very well explained!
However, i don't really think ''(nuclear) waste makes superb weapons of mass destruction too''... It's not always the case and i disagree with making nuclear weapons for mass destruction (think of yourself may be one of the victims )
« ÃŽÄŸ-NaÍÅ·-ŚħuÅ› »