what is the best alternative energy (one that SHOULD be the primary)?

Question

or, are there any energy sources that can be combined to work more efficiently?

Answer 1

Solar energy. Wind, waves and such energies could be secondarey/tertiary. The world should plan to limit energy usage to the maximum we can get (naturally) from Sun, wind, waves, etc. Tapping any other source is unnatural and will eventually deplete the source and cause global warming and other harmful effects.

Answer 2

CM makes some great points however I don't think the cost of solar will be that high forever. Besides, the cost is in the panel technology and since there are no moving parts, they are more resistant to breakage so the upfront cost is high, but is counteracted by the lifespan of the technology, baring further improvements - sort of like hardwood vs. carpeting.

I think solar hands down followed by wind power. Generally, the winter (lower solar radiation levels) means more wind and vice versa. Why not make the wind generation fan blades out of solar collection panels and literally combine the two into one?

For Hydrogen, you have to generate it from something and that takes power, however it would be a good portable fuel that could be generated from other green sources.

For Geothermal (volcanically active regions), you are limited by location.

For Hydroelectric (ocean currents, rivers), you are again limited by location.

For Nuclear (fission or someday maybe fusion), there are the waste and safety issues.

I think in the end, power generation is going to get alot more local. It won't be one huge grid tied together as home owners will start to have solar panels and large land owners have wind farms on their property. I think its going to move toward a more community based thing which would make it cheaper and more resistant to things like huge, tristate blackouts like a few years back.

Answer 3

The parameters that give you an answer are:
1-The cost of the energy (€/kWh)
2-The environmental impact

The technology that gives the best rate €/kWh is the eolic, the bigger is the eolic implant the better is the cost per kWh.
The worst technology respect the cost of energy is the solar energy that cost 4 times the eolic per kWh.

The environmental impact is somenthing to be defined: for exsample a big eolic pole is considered something with a big aestetic environmental impact.

We have other kind of renewable energies like biodiesel or bioalcool, geothermic and others; I think that the best solution is to use every technology we know in the place and with the metods where those systems give theyr best performance.

Last but not the least is important to reduce the wastes of energy for build smaller and economic implant.

Answer 4

They should all be used in combination for specific uses, for example:
Passive Solar in a well designed and insulated house with low voltage LED lighting and light piping that uses bio gas for back up heat and electrical power in a fuel cell or other type of cogeneration.
It won't happen in my lifetime but all the technologies have been around for a hundred years, there is no long term money in it for Big Corporations yet, and the average Joe can't do it without something blowing up...so here we are, still talking about it.

Answer 5

You didn't say what is "best". Or when it must be available.

Right now nuclear is the only thing that can replace a large amount of fossil fuels, and help with global warming and the increasing price of oil. Later solar may be able to do more, but right now it can just help nuclear. Wind and biofuels will likely always have a minor, but important, role.

If we're going to reduce global warming to something less than a disaster we really need all of them, and need to push ahead on all.

Answer 6

The best would probably be solar. Then hydrogen.

Answer 7

solar