The oil resources around the world are fastly depleting. The sources of oil that are there are very hard to get and refine. So should we continue to use oil as our main resource or should we find alternative energy.
[quoteWhat? Why biofuel can't be made of corn? Is ecological! No lead or carbon monoxide in the air, at least.
And there is no economic biofuel so far. Corn is being grown by farms as we are writing this. If it were too expensive, no one would be growing it.
And one of the only chances that the corn production would stop is the pollution caused by fossil fuels![/quote] But you also have to take into consideration the corn food market which is quite a bit larger than the corn biofuel market. Its just better for farmers to sell corn as food rather than to sell it as biofuel. Indeed most biofuel is so ineffecient cost wise that it is simply mixed with regular gas. Thats why there are so many 10% ethanol stations around.
I can even imagine: A world where you can take a deep breath on movimented cities (like Chicago or NY [no mean to offense anyone with this]) and don't die from lung cancer.
none taken, but it's more like asthma.
Uhm... maybe it would be good to them to install both solar and eolic technologies in the Sahara! Hot during day, windy during night!
The wind doesn't seem to be a problem, but placing solar panels in an enviornment that relies on their solar heat is a bad idea. It will in a way affect the enviornment because you're stealing sunlight from the things that live there,
The wind doesn't seem to be a problem, but placing solar panels in an enviornment that relies on their solar heat is a bad idea. It will in a way affect the enviornment because you're stealing sunlight from the things that live there,
Well thinking! Night desert winds are strong, right?
But you also have to take into consideration the corn food market which is quite a bit larger than the corn biofuel market. Its just better for farmers to sell corn as food rather than to sell it as biofuel. Indeed most biofuel is so ineffecient cost wise that it is simply mixed with regular gas. Thats why there are so many 10% ethanol stations around.
The biofuel market is way too small so far, yeah.
And by 10% ethanol stations around you mean in the US, right? In Brazil almost every gas station has ethanol.
I don't know if I've already said this, but ethanol can be (and is) made of sugarcorn too.
Well thinking! Why making eco-friendly energy if you're going to be... uh... eco-un-friendly doing that? Finding a better way would be better. Plus, Sahara's winds seem perfect for eolic energy.Night desert winds are strong, right?
I accidentally chopped out a part of my previous post. XP
What make you say that? Sure thing that the energy may come from less-than-ecological sources, but, at least, electric cars don't dump lead particles and carbon monoxide in the atmosphere (citing gasoline smoke from cars.).
The thing is, regular cars need a bit of fuel and a lot of air to advance. Electric cars need a f***ing amount of electricity to drive as far as regular car, and this energy is partly produced under use of fossil fuel. If you do the sum, electric cars need almost more fuel than regular cars, only because (at least early) electric cars are extremely inefficient.
What? Why biofuel can't be made of corn? Is ecological! No lead or carbon monoxide in the air, at least.
Production of the fuel itself needs to be fueled by fossil fuel, so it's not even that green. That's a fact. And secondly, use algae, or other organic matter that isn't used by the food industry, but for the love of whatevers holy to you, don't make ethanol out of corn, that could feed hungry people instead! I prefer to have less starvation and instead pollute a bit longer, instead of destroying aliments for a bit of not-even-so-fresh air.
The wind doesn't seem to be a problem, but placing solar panels in an enviornment that relies on their solar heat is a bad idea. It will in a way affect the enviornment because you're stealing sunlight from the things that live there,
Solar panels are not retrieving heat out of the environment, they only need sunrays that hit earth's surface on profusion. You could argue that the ground below the panel is a bit cooler, but the effect is evanescent if you compare the built over surface and the total surface of the Sahara.
The problem I see with the Sahara idea is that it is an unstable region. Adding that we would rely on that energy makes it a perfect target (easy and with huge effects) for terrorists.
is that a reason to kill the earth? because it's cheaper.
It's not killing the earth at all. And if people were to just suddenly abandon energy created from fossil fuels and focus on "green" energy. like 80% of people would have not enough power if not none. That would cause mayhem, imagine if suddenly all the power went out for like 10 years (which would be about how much time it would take to create enough dams, windmills, solar plants etc. to power everything.)
It will in a way affect the enviornment because you're stealing sunlight from the things that live there,
not if you put it on the side and top of buildings.
The thing is, regular cars need a bit of fuel and a lot of air to advance. Electric cars need a f***ing amount of electricity to drive as far as regular car, and this energy is partly produced under use of fossil fuel
true thats why we should look for something els then nucklear and fossil energys. if we can make all electricity eco-friendly then those cars will be 100% eco-friendly aswell.
electric cars need almost more fuel than regular cars, only because (at least early) electric cars are extremely inefficient.
electric cars are not extremely inefficient anymore. that reason doesn't count anymore. the technology is only getting better. it's just a matter of time befor they are going to beat fossil fuel cars.
Production of the fuel itself needs to be fueled by fossil fuel, so it's not even that green. That's a fact.
it's a fact for now. because the entire worlds society i build on fosil fuel use. if we can change that (we must change it because there will be nothing left of it eventualy.) than it will be 100% green.
@ sahara idea: you can better use the sea to build on then the sahara. the sahara is changing all the time and solar pannels could sink away or come lose and fall over when the sand is moving.
It's not killing the earth at all. And if people were to just suddenly abandon energy created from fossil fuels and focus on "green" energy. like 80% of people would have not enough power if not none. That would cause mayhem, imagine if suddenly all the power went out for like 10 years (which would be about how much time it would take to create enough dams, windmills, solar plants etc. to power everything.)
you got the wrong idea there. i never said we have to cut of the fossil fuels right now. thats just impossible. -period but some people want to stick whit fossil fuels because it's cheaper. that comment of mine was towards those people that think that. because they are not willing to think about a better future.
but some people want to stick whit fossil fuels because it's cheaper. that comment of mine was towards those people that think that. because they are not willing to think about a better future.
Well it's obvious that in the future people are gonna have to abandon fossil fuels, because "green" energy won't be as expensive by then and most of the fossil fuels will have run out anyways. I don't think anybody actually thinks about only using fossil fuels forever. It sounded like you were saying that people shouldn't use fossil fuels because they are bad. Period.
The thing is, regular cars need a bit of fuel and a lot of air to advance. Electric cars need a f***ing amount of electricity to drive as far as regular car, and this energy is partly produced under use of fossil fuel. If you do the sum, electric cars need almost more fuel than regular cars, only because (at least early) electric cars are extremely inefficient.
By that you mean the almost infamous 1999 Honda Insight?
Production of the fuel itself needs to be fueled by fossil fuel, so it's not even that green. That's a fact.
Maybe, but fossil fuel need more fossil fuel to be created and transported too.
And secondly, use algae,
Why did you not said that earlier? That's a nice idea!
or other organic matter that isn't used by the food industry, but for the love of whatevers holy to you, don't make ethanol out of corn, that could feed hungry people instead! I prefer to have less starvation and instead pollute a bit longer, instead of destroying aliments for a bit of not-even-so-fresh air.
I never said ethanol made out of corn only. I even said eolic energy and supported solar energy. I also said that ethanol can be made out of sugarcorn too.
@SaharaIdea
Uhm... maybe solar panels would cover natural habitats and be targets to terrorists, the latter happening to eolic fans...
Well, terrorists don't attack own country's oil plants, right? Why would they do that with eolic fans? It's finality is the same.
Why would they do that with eolic fans? It's finality is the same.
Nope. If we would really install a huge amount of solar panels in the sahara, that would create a huge amount of power. Other states would rely on that energy. Because you have to transport it extremly far it's an easy target. If you attack an oil plant then that doesn't really hurt us the West.
Uhm... if at least Mid-West governments were more... pacific... the energy could belong to all...
Nope. If we would really install a huge amount of solar panels in the sahara, that would create a huge amount of power.
Solar panels? I was talking about eolic fans :P
If you attack an oil plant then that doesn't really hurt us the West.
Uh... I do not live in The Middle-East but... okay...
US's high use of petroleum would not cause politic commotion against the attackers of the oil plant? (NO MEANT TO OFFENSE WITH ANY OF THIS POST'S PHRASES.)
