What is the best 'alternative' energy?

[Raptoricus]

I notice no one's mentioned Geo Thermal energy yet, in my opinion this is the most reliable, renewable and easily obtained (well if enough companies put money together to do it anyway) form of energy which is available to us, and seems as it isn't subject to any variables (like solar has clouds, wind has low wind problems, tidal, well that's a different story) I think that it's the most viable way forward.

 

[sms_117b]

Fluid Karma!

lol, Nuclear, easily

 

[Zeromaxx]

The greatest untapped source would have to be the pure heat radiating out of me when I sleep...I could boil water. The best, realistically, would probably be nuclear fission since we don't yet have the ability to perform fusion, though my votes for that when we eventually do.

 

[LOOY]

Build like, the matrix, but use battery chickens instead of people.

 

[Debatra]

Here's a thought:

The main problem with Nuclear energy is that the rods have to be cooled, the water they use becomes radioactive, and they can't do anything with it; right? Well, how about Antarctica? Expose the rods to the freezing air. Of course, you then run the risk of freezing something important.

 

[Lonan]

Put a few miles of solar panels in some place far North or South where there's six months of sunlight.

How about some windfarms in Chicago?

solar power is still generally inefficient, also not making any power at night so you need a way to store energy(also leads to energy loss)
Wind farms eh not bad but have you heard the noise they make? sounds like a low pressure whoosh constantly over and over, so they have to be kept away from people. also not a whole lot of energy for the space they take up.

I'm just gonna go with nuke power as best, or hydroelectric, at least untill will come up with a better way to harness sunlight.

There's a windfarm not far from where I live, and on the off chance there's enough wind for them to do anything but sit there, they're quiet. It would probably be different in the Windy City of all places, there's still the space issue.

How about Tornado Alley? [/semi-sarcasm]

There's actually a Canadian scientist who has invented a self-sufficient tornado which once it gets going, can maintain itself indefinitely and power quite a few homes. Unfortunately, there's few risks involved, as you might imagine, and one them was that the tornado might get lose.

 

[Ranooth]

Monkey power anyone?

 

[Debatra]

Put a few miles of solar panels in some place far North or South where there's six months of sunlight.

How about some windfarms in Chicago?

solar power is still generally inefficient, also not making any power at night so you need a way to store energy(also leads to energy loss)
Wind farms eh not bad but have you heard the noise they make? sounds like a low pressure whoosh constantly over and over, so they have to be kept away from people. also not a whole lot of energy for the space they take up.

I'm just gonna go with nuke power as best, or hydroelectric, at least untill will come up with a better way to harness sunlight.

There's a windfarm not far from where I live, and on the off chance there's enough wind for them to do anything but sit there, they're quiet. It would probably be different in the Windy City of all places, there's still the space issue.

How about Tornado Alley? [/semi-sarcasm]

There's actually a Canadian scientist who has invented a self-sufficient tornado which once it gets going, can maintain itself indefinitely and power quite a few homes. Unfortunately, there's few risks involved, as you might imagine, and one them was that the tornado might get lose.

Well, here's to hoping they find a safe place to put it.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Anti-Matter Reaction.

Matter Anti-Matter Reactions are the most efficient process in the known universe, 100% mass to energy conversion. But where does the anti-matter come from? Current anti-matter producing processes are extremely energy intensive for extremely small yield and anti-matter has to be stored within force fields. Without a harvestable source of anti-matter using a matter anti-matter reaction for any practical use is a null prospect.

Fusion is a much more viable source of power. Heavy water (deuterium) is abundant so maintaining the reaction would be fairly cheap. Harvesting power from a fusion reaction is more difficult but efficient photovoltaic cells combined with steam driven turbines should be effective.

Hydrogen fuel cells were suggested, they aren't energy efficient in the grand scheme though. The process of combining Hydrogen and Oxygen to form water does produce a great deal of power but the problem is actually having gaseous Hydrogen to react. We have very little gaseous Hydrogen on Earth as nearly all of our Hydrogen is bound in organic molecules and water. Extracting it requires more energy than the inverse reaction produces. It's a great way to power a vehicle but not a good general power source.

Installing pressure responsive voltaic cells in city streets could produce enough power for traffic and street lights. There just isn't enough power inherent in stomping feet (even millions of them) to do much with.

There are two principle problems with solar power. 1) photovoltaic cells are not very efficient (currently) and 2) they require a view of the sun. Mounting solar panels on roofs is a good idea but if it is cloudy they receive much less energy. Unreliable sources should never be the basis for a civilization's power, only a supplement.

Geothermal power is basically making water hot with volcanoes. It is a nice power source but only in minimal, careful use.

Power from fluid dynamics can be reliable and cheap but takes up quite a bit of space and doesn't produce very high yields.

Fission is an all round good and reliable power source that has an unfortunate bi-product. A few more vaults in the desert and that wouldn't be a problem but we are close to being able to effectively use processes that have no wastes or clean wastes.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that the best alternative energy source is zero-point energy (not from our own universe of course).

 

[Erana]

I notice no one's mentioned Geo Thermal energy yet, in my opinion this is the most reliable, renewable and easily obtained (well if enough companies put money together to do it anyway) form of energy which is available to us, and seems as it isn't subject to any variables (like solar has clouds, wind has low wind problems, tidal, well that's a different story) I think that it's the most viable way forward.

But.... what about the lava kittens?

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

Here's a thought:

The main problem with Nuclear energy is that the rods have to be cooled, the water they use becomes radioactive, and they can't do anything with it; right? Well, how about Antarctica? Expose the rods to the freezing air. Of course, you then run the risk of freezing something important.

Beer is more radioactive than the coolant from a nuclear fission reactor. The problem is the nuclear waste (and the panicky, stupid public).

EDIT:

Like dumping on the moon. (I'm not joking.)

It would actually be cheaper and easier to just send it into the Sun which would also dodge the people who would complain that we polute the Moon.

What about polluting the Sun?

 

[cuddly_tomato]

why not tidal power in the Gulf?
why not in the Pungent Sound? oh yea... Ted Kennedy
private companies sell everything you need to make a solar array or a wind farm, the issue is zoning

Tidal power isn't renewable. I don't think it's a good option.

how is it not renewable?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power

This is the problem with wikipedia - it is a huge croc of shite. NO form of energy is "renewable". If you take energy from something, that something is going to loose some of it.

The tides, and the resistance of the water to being yanked about as it is, is doing two things:-

1. It is slowing down the rotational speed of the earth. The dinosaurs had a shorter day than we do.

2. It is pushing the moon further away from us.

Adding tidal power generators will increase that resistance proportionally to the amount of energy you use, and therefore you will accelerate the two effects I mentioned above.

 

[Shade Jackrabbit]

I notice no one's mentioned Geo Thermal energy yet, in my opinion this is the most reliable, renewable and easily obtained (well if enough companies put money together to do it anyway) form of energy which is available to us, and seems as it isn't subject to any variables (like solar has clouds, wind has low wind problems, tidal, well that's a different story) I think that it's the most viable way forward.

But.... what about the lava kittens?

It's only causing extinction if people find out.

 

[Lonan]

Here's a thought:

The main problem with Nuclear energy is that the rods have to be cooled, the water they use becomes radioactive, and they can't do anything with it; right? Well, how about Antarctica? Expose the rods to the freezing air. Of course, you then run the risk of freezing something important.

Beer is more radioactive than the coolant from a nuclear fission reactor. The problem is the nuclear waste (and the panicky, stupid public).

There was actually fourth generation nuclear power being invented until Bill Clinton gave into the demands of the hippy naturalists who demanded it be shut down, because they heard the word "nuclear," and OHHHHH BUDDY. They said nuclear. It must be bad. Instead of saying "boo" to scare people at Halloween, we should say "nuclear" and put back production on nuclear energy that generates hardly any waste by at least a decade and half.

 

[zacaron]

nuclear for me we just need to find a place to put the leftovers

Here's a thought:

The main problem with Nuclear energy is that the rods have to be cooled, the water they use becomes radioactive, and they can't do anything with it; right? Well, how about Antarctica? Expose the rods to the freezing air. Of course, you then run the risk of freezing something important.

Beer is more radioactive than the coolant from a nuclear fission reactor. The problem is the nuclear waste (and the panicky, stupid public).

There was actually fourth generation nuclear power being invented until Bill Clinton gave into the demands of the hippy naturalists who demanded it be shut down, because they heard the word "nuclear," and OHHHHH BUDDY. They said nuclear. It must be bad. Instead of saying "boo" to scare people at Halloween, we should say "nuclear" and put back production on nuclear energy that generates hardly any waste by at least a decade and half.

argh science damn the hippys

 

[Ctrl-Alt-Elite]

Korean slaves running around in a wheel!

ahhh nothing creates electricity like korean slaves

 

[Lonan]

Here's a thought:

The main problem with Nuclear energy is that the rods have to be cooled, the water they use becomes radioactive, and they can't do anything with it; right? Well, how about Antarctica? Expose the rods to the freezing air. Of course, you then run the risk of freezing something important.

Beer is more radioactive than the coolant from a nuclear fission reactor. The problem is the nuclear waste (and the panicky, stupid public).

EDIT:

Like dumping on the moon. (I'm not joking.)

It would actually be cheaper and easier to just send it into the Sun which would also dodge the people who would complain that we polute the Moon.

What about polluting the Sun?

The scale of our garbage compared to the scale of the sun makes it insignificant, I'm pretty sure. The sun would incinerate the garbage before even coming into contact with it. And if were worried about it's incinerated form being sent back to us in some way,(by it's radiation or something, I don't know) we could just dump it underneath the sun. Take a look at this to see how the earth's size compares to the sun, and then consider how the size of our garbage loads would compare to the earth. http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/interactives/messenger/psc/PlanetSize.html

 

[goodman528]

Hydrogen fusion, and Hydrogen fuel cells.

Power plants:

Hydrogen + Hydrogen --> Helium (escapes into space)
Hydrogen + Helium --> Lithium (used in laptop batteries)

Cars / Central heating:

Hydrogen + Oxygen --> Water (which we can drink)

Wind power is a bit over rated, though making the turbine blades with laminated bamboo does make it a good idea. Solar power is way too expensive, if we can "print" solar panels like printing paper, then maybe. Tidal / Wave / Hydro are all good, but can't see them as the main source of power.

And always remember, despite whatever the environmental nuts are selling you, Oil still has another 100 years to go, Natural gas has another 200 years, and Coal another 1000 years. Did you know that 40 years ago, the Oil estimate was at the contemporary rate of consumption all Oil will be used up in 40 years time? Interestingly, today that same figure is telling us at the current consumption rate Oil will be used up 40 years from now.

 

[Chezzz]

nuclear or geothermal...

both very effective, can be used anywhere and geothermal will last as long as teh world does, without killing anyone (hopefully)

 

[Mindex]

The souls of children. My computer maintenance teacher knows how to harvest them.