Read a book
To the 1% of this forum you know who you are. I'm ashamed you became exactly what you protest against. it is embarrassing that you will not listen to other views and quickly call people trolls.
Listen people have great ideas and if you listen to them you could perhaps learn something.
no just no sorry
i have been studying these things and i have seen the data first hand that we cannot produce enough electricity with solar or wind. Plus do you even know what toxic chemicals are in solar panels that the EPA allows to just be thrown in the trash.
Nuclear is the way to go. The future of this type of power is endless with fusion most likely able to produce power in the next 15 years. The system we use can be supplemented with nuclear power in a short time. Megawatt reactors can power small cities with minimal work or effort or harm. Storage of waste has gotten so high tech that it shouldn't be a worry to anyone anymore.
Even most environmentalist are arguing for more nuclear power it helpful to our future as a system.
Solar only 10% energy comes back into what was taken to produce it. Silicon and mercury used in it non recyclable. Only being able to use for 10-15 years. unpredictable energy influxes
Wind unpredicted energy influxes. Takes thousands of miles to plant these turbines. They use tons of steel that require iron and coal to be mined. Very heavy maintenance cost. Will last about 20+ years if well maintained
river/dam every useable stream has been used up and it does provide enough power to only the areas around it. damages local water life. life span 100+ requires constant upkeep.
tidal destroys beaches and other close items such as sea life. they have not been implemented so can cause other effects that are lurking variables. installing price is very heavy. lifespan ?
geothermal. dangerous and limited. but other than those two it is a good source of fuel. But to get it you will have to wreck environments to build structures. life span = 9 billion years
nuclear fission high start up cost. year or two to build depending on how complex the plant is. waste that must be treated and put away every 5 years. most plants are installing on site storage spent fuel is size of small crate. only thermal waste lifespan 50+
nuclear fusion. Very very high start up cost. problems with converting energy into electricity. When done it will be very low cost to run and no waste other thermal heat. The power source is tritium or He_3 both both that are hard to get and will require us to mine the moon or deep sea. power supply though is unlimited for this we would need only a few plants to power the united states. lifespan 9 billion years
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/debate_does_the_world_need_nuclear_energy.html the guy who proposed the solar and wind use false data and old propaganda. But non the less good talk
Must be logged in to send messages.
Feb. 3, 2012