Should we learn to conserve our energy better, or should we develop and use alternative energy sources?

Question

Decide which type of alternative energy resource would be best used in your area of the state or country. Include the state and the general area of the state that you live in.

Tell what resource you think would be best used to replace some of the fossil fuel

Answer 1

What should be done is apply good engineering. The energy and polution problem are linked and can be fixed if good engineering was in use.

Answer 2

Ok to answer your question completely I will break it down...

Should we learn to conserve our energy better, or should we develop and use alternative energy sources?
-BOTH, that is part of our problem know, no one thought to diversify when things were going great. That is why we have such high gas prices-purely an issue of supply and demand. The demand was high and the supply was flowing but now every time a natural disaster occurs somehow it is related to the availability of gas.
Decide which type of alternative energy resource would be best used in your area of the state or country. Include the state and the general area of the state that you live in.
-IN the midwest (Metro Detroit, MI area) corn and other farm grown items would be a great option as would anything that can be grown. I am for anything that is currenlty being tested as well.

Tell what resource you think would be best used to replace some of the fossil fuel
-WHATEVER works, LOL. We should be able to try anything and if it doesnt work then try something else.

Its like the other guy said-whatever options are presented have to be affordable to the consumer and allow the supplier to make a profit or else the twain shall never meet.

I hope this helps!

Answer 3

Conservation is the best way to go -- More efficient cars, house heating, air conditioning, lighting, and elimination of unnecessary travel. The latter can be done by telecommuting, phone calls, e-mail, carpools, using mass transit, to name a few. Alternative energy is more expensive than what we're using now; that's why it's alternative. When wind turbines and solar power get cheaper get cheaper than fossil fuel, they will be used more. Nuclear will be good when they solve the waste problem. Probably fast breeder reactors are the answer.
I live in northern California, but I think what I say goes for anywhere in the world.

Answer 4

Bob is correct. There is no single alternative energy source available today that can completely replace oil. Theoretically, nuclear could replace fossil fuels in the generation of electricity, but we're all aware of the issue with nuclear waste.

We have to not only conserve, but we need to exploit every alternative energy source available. And, there will still be places to use oil and coal.

Answer 5

Any alternative must be able to be produced in quantities to support the population.

It must be economical. If it is too expensive, people will not accept it. Most people only have a fixed amount of money to spend for energy. The suppliers must be able to make a profit. If these don't happen, any type of alternative energy won't happen.

What good is a hydrogen powered car that costs $100,000. Most people won't buy it. What good is a cheap fuel efficient car if it is about as exciting to drive as a golf cart. People won't buy it.

For any alternative fuel source to succeed, it must perform as well as existing fuels and cost at least about the same.

Answer 6

Recycle, Reuse!! I also feel, that alternative energy sources should be being made readily available. I live near San Francisco, CA, and I think Solar energy could replace a lot of fossil fuel, etc.,
They have begun using a low-emission buses...but there is still more, as individual we can do, and create more awarness.

Answer 7

Does that mean you admit your involvement in Muslim countries is simply for there energy sources? How very honest of you. Because everyone knows its not for the invisible weapons of mass destruction or to liberate Iraqi people we all know its for oil, pipe lines and power don't we. 1. Developing an alternative energy source is a great idea in any ones book. 2. Deport all people who preach violence regardless of whether they are Muslim or not. Oh wait, what are you going to do with all your home grown people who preach violence? Where you gonna deport them too? 3. Leave all Muslim countries anyway, you have no right to be there. 4. Close your borders fantastic idea then none of the rest of us will have to listen to those loud, arrogant, obnoxious American tourists. Oh does the border not work both ways? Will it keep everyone in too? There are plenty of Americans born and raised Muslim, there are plenty of Americans converting to Islam 20,000 a year where are you going to deport Muslim American citizens too? I am a westerner, Scottish in fact never lived in a Muslim country ever, but hey the stereotype that we are all immigrants and from Muslim countries never gets old does it? Would it be a good idea? Its an idea, but a good one? a well though through one? Eerrrrmmmmmm NO!

Answer 8

Conservation is a stop-gap measure. We NEED to develop new sources, Since we cannot predict the future, it is necessary to work on ALL fronts until we have sufficient energy for the present AND the future. Here in CA, we can take advantage of wind, solar, wave and tidal forces, hydroelectric, and nuclear, as well as zero point power, which should be researched for the future.

Answer 9

Both conserving energy and using alternative sources should be done.

I am an electrical engineer from South Dakota and am always looking for more efficient ways to do things. My sister is building a new house so I convinced her and her husband to buy a Ground-Source Heat-pump. This system uses the geothermal energy of the earth to heat and cool their house. This will save them up to 70% on their energy needs. It will also save them money and will essentially pay for itself in a matter of years. Geothermal Energy of this type will work in almost any part of the country where you can drill a hole to run pipes. The technology is already available and doesn't cost much more than a standard heating and cooling system.

South Dakota gets most of it's power from either coal or hydro-electric power plants. There is currently a push for wind power because both North and South Dakota have some of the best wind resources in the US. (basically we rarely ever have a calm day.)

A Wind system costs less in money and energy to produce than solar but still has some of the same draw backs. Both systems require battery banks and extra wiring systems before something could be used. Wind and sun are both non-consistent sources so days when the sun is weak or the wind is down you receive no benefit.

Photoelectric solar panels are very inefficient and very expensive to produce. The amount of energy that it takes to produce a solar panel is actually MORE than the amount of energy that the panel will be able to produce within it's lifetime. ( given an average lifespan of the panel and current technology ) While the panel may save YOU money and energy, it costs the enviroment more energy than it can recoupe.

All three systems are currently only supplimentary at best. We don't have the technology to use any single source by itself completely. Solar and Wind both require better energy storage techniques to suppliment days of low production. Geothermal heat/cooling systems still require another source of energy. Solar systems need to become much more efficient before they are truly viable except for providing power in very remote locations.

In terms of providing large scale benefits to the masses using industrial sized verions of these energy sources we need to find ways to transport energy over greater distances with better super-conductors or microwave technology or something new

Currently in South Dakota I would say using ground-source heat pumps to reduce energy needs and using large wind turbines to produce supplimental energy to our hydro plants would be the best option. That way we could eliminate the need for coal power.

Elsewhere I think people seriously need to consider Nuclear power as the main source with other "green" sources as supplimentary.

Answer 10

Ethanol would be good to replace gas in my area because it can be used in our existing cars, even if there not considered "flex fuel" for power in my area we need to use wind power we have a lot of lakes and open Fields so the wind can gain strength. we need to all learn how to conserve energy because abuse on any one source will make it to hard for that source to keep up.

Answer 11

Clearly we should do both.

Everybody has a favorite alternative energy source. This is a big problem, we'll need them all; nuclear, solar, wind, biofuels.

This isn't about choosing the "best" thing. It's about figuring out what's best in a given situation.