| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Energy Forum » Which kind of energy?
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Ethan |
 Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I am no expert in energy issue but really keen to learn & understand
more from this group.
There has been many discussions on various kinds of energy sources,
for example solar, wind, bio.
Which one kind do you think we should spend more research & resources
on?
Why not alternative types? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Sevenhundred Elves |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 01:33:15 -0700 (PDT), Ethan <Ethan.H35@gmail.com>
wrote:
Quote: I am no expert in energy issue but really keen to learn & understand
more from this group.
There has been many discussions on various kinds of energy sources,
for example solar, wind, bio.
Which one kind do you think we should spend more research & resources
on?
Why not alternative types?
Ah, a poll!
I say nuclear is most important to get started on asap, because that's
what gives most bang for the bucks quickest, and we are sort of in a
hurry now, what with the oil running out and all. But since building
nuclear power plants is only done on large scale, there are
opportunities for smaller companies to harvest wind and solar, too.
I'd say hydro, too, but I have a feeling that we're already getting
almost as much power from hydro plants as is practically possible.
S. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| sno |
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Sevenhundred Elves wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 01:33:15 -0700 (PDT), Ethan <Ethan.H35@gmail.com
wrote:
I am no expert in energy issue but really keen to learn & understand
more from this group.
There has been many discussions on various kinds of energy sources,
for example solar, wind, bio.
Which one kind do you think we should spend more research & resources
on?
Why not alternative types?
Ah, a poll!
I say nuclear is most important to get started on asap, because that's
what gives most bang for the bucks quickest, and we are sort of in a
hurry now, what with the oil running out and all. But since building
nuclear power plants is only done on large scale, there are
opportunities for smaller companies to harvest wind and solar, too.
I agree with the above....and would add that we should start building
"cookie cutter" nuclear plants....at the present each plant is built
"hand made" no two being the same....the cost and speed of building
could be brought down if a design of a medium range plant were
decided on and then copies of them constructed....
Quote: I'd say hydro, too, but I have a feeling that we're already getting
almost as much power from hydro plants as is practically possible.
S.
There are still a number of possible small/microhydro sites that
are not being utilized....a lot of them for environmental reasons...
however there are work arounds for a number of these sites...example:
fishladders...some were not developed for financial reasons...the
power generated was not worth the cost of development...however at
present they need to be reconsidered.....
Both nuclear and hydro are technologies that I believe have been
proven....and could make the biggest immediate dent in our energy
problems...
thank you for listening to my thoughts.....have fun....sno
--
No matter how dangerous nuclear power may or
may not be.....
Is it any more dangerous then what we are doing
now.....???
This tag line is generated by:
SLNG (Silly Little Nuclear Generator) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:06 am
|
|