9 Responses

1. Wind power is going to be a part of the energy equation. Nuclear power has problems of security and safety so having other power will help. Nobody is going to bother flying a plane into a wind turbine.

2. Wind and solar power are gaining in usage as the technology becomes more efficient.

   Nuclear power will not be “clean” until efficient fusion becomes available. Fission does not directly pollute the air, but you still have the radioactive byproducts.

3. i hope it becomes an increasing one.. but i believe water, wind, solar, thermal, and a few others will take on a big part as well…

4. The simple answer is it depends on the economy.

   Lets say scientist found an energy source that is 1million times greater then nuclear power. Safer, cleaner, no side effects from exposure and costs next to nothing to make. Lets also say they find it tomorrow. When would that power source be used? Most likely never. Why? Because money controls advancement and the corporations control the money. If the corporations cant profit from it they wont use it.

5. Nuclear POwer is not Clean Power. Just because it doesn’t have any carbon emissions doesn’t make it green, or renewable. In fact there are serious concerns as to the levels of plutonium and uranium that are available for processing. Added to which, they are usually mined in politically unstable locations.

   Nuclear power creates a very dangerous volume of waste – and even after re-processing it is still highliy radioactive and will continue to be for tens of thousands of years afterwards. Decomissioning of old nuclear power plants still leaves an area that is highliy radioactive – so whichever way you look at it you are consuming large amounts of natural resources to build nuclear power stations, run them, fuel them and store their waste.

   Truely green energy can only be thought of as those methods that generate electricity from the Earth’s natural energy (wind, wave, geothermal) without any adverse emissions (both carbon or nuclear).

   ——————————————————————-

   Following on from your revision:

   I have done some work investingating the commercial potential for renewable resources and the one form that came back as a positive was offshore windpower. This is particularly the case in Western Europe, especially for the UK & Ireland, Spain, Nordics and Balkans. Wind conditions in these areas are continually reliable and strong. Offshore offers the industrial scale needed to provide consistent, high levels of energy without the “Not In My Back Yard” phenomena.

   When considering the levels of carbon reduction comitments that EU countries and other Kyoto signatures have agreed upon, the tax breaks and investment opportunities available, Wind POwer and other offshore projects (tidal, wave) have the most backing as well as the chance of being the most productive.

6. I hope NOT!
   There are security issues related to it.

   Wind and Thermal Energy are the best (my opinion). Hope they start investing in them and make them even more efficient.

7. Yes it will, it is more effective than hydroelectric power, only a small mass of uranium can produce energy in the nuclear reactor. but the downsides are radioactive products with long half life.

8. Nuclear energy blows up the atoms.How can we possibly thinks its clean.In a chemistry formula you can change one form to the next by providing pressure and heat or energy.If you don’t have any more atoms to work with this simple transformation is impossible.There is no more atoms to bind to others.Truly clean energy is like coal,once you do transform the substance all the atoms are still there but transformed in a pollution for humans but with time the atoms link together with other things creating for example wood.Lets say this wood burns we create short term pollution etc.But we can still create wood in the long term.Reusable!!!Nuclear energy is not reusable to us much.Its like burning your house to heat your house once.Not very smart. Better use outside wood.

   Once we blow up all the atoms we can’t use these atoms to create wood or anything useful to humans at least. What will we sit on,a wood chair or a bunch of heat, as technology progresses we will be able to transform any atoms to pure energy(used loosely) like heat.But what will become of the earth with no molecules to walk on.The same we are made off.Will we float in space more dispersed.

   Also if we take 1$ worth of mater and produce 100 000$ worth of energy and it cost 1$ a year to store. The net result after 100 000 year is a net profit of 0$.

   We need to wake up and fast! Somebody far away like another solar system might like the idea of more energy leaving from earth to theirs.Energy is just transformed. not lost. But we are working hard on losing it to other solar systems.Lets Keep are atoms(Reusable) not the waste.

   Note:100 000 years to eliminate nuclear waste clean….stupid.
   Coal is way cleaner to humans long term but not short term because they don’t hide! its waste like nuclear waste.

   Added on 22/01/2007
   The cleanest would be the ones already there for the taking like wind,tides,solar,chemical reactions from are wasted products,recycling like using a bag often not once,food containers like buying bulk etc.Using energy more effectively like not wasting,building energy efficent homes,not having 1000 pounds cars to pull arround,turning the lights off on streets that are not used…could have one sensor at one end when you get to the end of the street it would shut off the street lights.Wearing shoes and warm clothes in the house,taking showers instead of baths,Using appliances that don’t use 10% of its normal power consumption to keep the clock running.Most appliances do use 10% when off, unplug them or get a power bar and turn it off.
   Lower the temperature when your away…Mostly saving it and getting it free like in cold weather paint the side of the house facing the sun black…sacrificing beauty for efficentcy.

9. The cleanest, most reliable, the strongest is water power. Why not put paddle wheel type floating frames all along the rivers. There is a constant flow of water( in contrast to wind, and even lesser from solar). If it would turn generators, huge amounts of power can be produced constantly, with minimal expense. They could be smaller or larger according to the size of the rivers or streams. I saw one in use and it was so simple every body could be generating power in their backyards.( ie in running streams or rivers).