With such a sharp run-up in the price of both crude oil and
natural gas, as well as in the prices of the stock of companies
involved in oil and gas production and servicing, do the
potential opportunities in the energy sector instead lie with
companies that are investing in alternative energy sources?
2007-10-28 18:56:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by smaccas 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nuclear power is the cheapest energy source that doesn't emit CO2 right now and is also proven to be capable of supplying the energy needs of modern civilisation (France gets about 80% of their electricity from it) along with there being good arguments that we should be able to rely on it for a long time to come.
It's also the only thing right now that can actually replace fossil fuels.
Solar and Wind aren't reliable enough to replace fossil fuels and most of the good hydro sites are higher already used or won't be because of environmental concerns while clean coal seems to be more about PR than actually replacing dirty coal.
2007-10-28 21:04:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by bestonnet_00 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Build ing these power plants will makes millions of the highest wage jobs an hourly worker can have!
Go to www.uspto.gov and enter patent number 5,430,333.
There you will see pollution free electric power able to be built to be more than 1000 times that of our largest Nuclear Reactor!
Plant Vogtle, our last Nuclear Reactor makes only a fraction of the power of my patented power plant!
The first generation “baby” power plants from this new technology makes 1000 megawatts.
Vogtle cost $10 billion, 30 years ago.
These new power plants cost $2.5 billion in today’s money.
Vogtle is about to be retired, as are all our other Nuclear plants.
All the fueled power plants only have about a 30 life span.
The power plant design you will see at patent office site live well over 100 years.
They burn NO fuel what so ever!
It costs more to demolish a Nuclear plant than to build one new!
The spent Nuclear fuel has a 25,000 year storage problem with no solution yet, and a tremendous cost that defies accurate estimation due to the very long time frame.
Nuclear power has been estimated to cost more $50.00 per kilowatt hour when the demolition and storage costs are applied.
Guess who gets to foot that bill, the tax payer!
Being fuel-less the design you see at the patent office has a cost of about 3 cents per kilowatt hour.
Coal fired power plants make 8 lbs of air pollution to run 100 watt light bulb for an hour.
There are NO cost estimations for the clean up of all that pollution.
We keep seeing in the news about coal miners dieing in cave-ins.
With the high cost of electric power being hidden for so long by our politicians using their abysmally poor judgment to allow this to happen in the first place. Then compounding the problem with their constant lying about it to all of us, and the problem now coming to light despite their best efforts to lie and hide it. We are now stuck with the costs of their abysmally poor judgment after their being “paid” by big power to lie to us about the scope of this problem for decades.
Call all your elected official state, local, and federal. Tell them you want the pollution free electric power you saw at the patent office web site! Tell them to get off their assets and get moving on making pollution free and cheaper electric power happen ASAP!
Or swallow their lies so more until our nation is so polluted our children die younger than ever before. Cancer is running rampant everywhere, it comes from all the pollution our elected officials are allowing to be spewed into “our” environment every day. It time to put pollution into it’s proper place, “THE PAST”!
We now have the technology, we can build it, it’s 100% clean, and the electric power is cheaper than ANY fueled power plant.
I’m working on taking my utility company public now!
I hope to building these power plants very soon!
2007-10-29 08:50:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
cheapest resources will lead to economic growth. i think solar and nuclear energy will work.
2007-10-28 19:56:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by nadia a 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think the nuclear fusion technologies and the water technologies. they are potential clean and have no waste
2007-10-29 03:17:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋