It is a matter of how to store the wind power. Wind power has one big thing going for it... The wind blows strongest on really hot days or when the weather is foul. And these times are exactly the times that the most electricity is used.
There's a theoretical "zero point energy" that could -- on a strictly hypothetical level -- power a perpetual motion machine. It would, as far as I understand it, destroy small amounts of spacetime, but... everything would just move into adjacent space and time.
There's a new type of electrolysis which might make next-generation solar viable, after all. Wind power is still a bunch of BS, as far as I can tell, though.
I researched that too, and I came to the same conclusion: essentially another perpetual-motion machine. Scientific American (the magazine) gets a few design ideas from inventors every year for a perpetual-motion machine. It's an idea that will not die, despite that fact that no such machine can exist.
Hydrogen is a storage solution, when you add electricity to water in the right way, you get hydrogen. Therefore it will be suitable for use in conjunction with solar and wind, which are intermittent power sources. You can also get it by cracking it out of coal and natural gas, but you still have the non hydrogen parts of coal and natural gas to deal with. -Much as the Joe Cell may seem attractive, it is not the answer, as it is essentially a perpetual motion engine concept, and therefore unworkable. You need energy input to get energy output. Otherwise you are breaking the laws of thermodynamics.
The chief problem in nuclear development is the waste. You can't get rid of it. The chief problem with wind and solar is they are intermittant, but if you find ways to store wind and solar power for when they are needed, this problem is mitigated. Cleaned coal is unproven, we have not yet actually stored the excess CO2 underground, but using the CO2 for industrial uses may be a good answer... Finding more industrial uses beyond fire extinguishers, dry ice and carbonated beverages would be the key here. Ethanol would be only appropriate where there are massive agricultural surpluses. Growing corn or sugar specifically for ethanol simply drives up the prices for corn and sugar. Drilling for more oil is simply a stopgap solution. What we need to do is find ways to do the same things, with less fuel, like VW, for example, is doing with its newer fuel efficient engines (1000 km per tank)
I watch stargate too... I doubt that it would be really practical.
It is a matter of how to store the wind power. Wind power has one big thing going for it... The wind blows strongest on really hot days or when the weather is foul. And these times are exactly the times that the most electricity is used.
There's a theoretical "zero point energy" that could -- on a strictly hypothetical level -- power a perpetual motion machine. It would, as far as I understand it, destroy small amounts of spacetime, but... everything would just move into adjacent space and time.
There's a new type of electrolysis which might make next-generation solar viable, after all. Wind power is still a bunch of BS, as far as I can tell, though.
ALL of the above....but for now, DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
I researched that too, and I came to the same conclusion: essentially another perpetual-motion machine. Scientific American (the magazine) gets a few design ideas from inventors every year for a perpetual-motion machine. It's an idea that will not die, despite that fact that no such machine can exist.
Hydrogen is a storage solution, when you add electricity to water in the right way, you get hydrogen. Therefore it will be suitable for use in conjunction with solar and wind, which are intermittent power sources. You can also get it by cracking it out of coal and natural gas, but you still have the non hydrogen parts of coal and natural gas to deal with. -Much as the Joe Cell may seem attractive, it is not the answer, as it is essentially a perpetual motion engine concept, and therefore unworkable. You need energy input to get energy output. Otherwise you are breaking the laws of thermodynamics.
Looks like we are really stark.
How about hydrogen ? You should know something of this Philgtaylor, being from australia.(I'm talking about the joe cell of course)
The chief problem in nuclear development is the waste. You can't get rid of it. The chief problem with wind and solar is they are intermittant, but if you find ways to store wind and solar power for when they are needed, this problem is mitigated. Cleaned coal is unproven, we have not yet actually stored the excess CO2 underground, but using the CO2 for industrial uses may be a good answer... Finding more industrial uses beyond fire extinguishers, dry ice and carbonated beverages would be the key here. Ethanol would be only appropriate where there are massive agricultural surpluses. Growing corn or sugar specifically for ethanol simply drives up the prices for corn and sugar. Drilling for more oil is simply a stopgap solution. What we need to do is find ways to do the same things, with less fuel, like VW, for example, is doing with its newer fuel efficient engines (1000 km per tank)
All of the above. We don't know which process will end up saving the day. But won't know until we try them all.....
Everything listed!
But a case can be made about France's successful nuclear program.