Alternative energies?

Question

IMO i feel we have one way out of this, we need to claim as much oil as possible first and foremost, if that means we need to stay at war, which i believe is one reason why we are at war, but why not, you need to fight for what you want. second we need to make nuclear plants everywhere, highly efficient plants are now available and could power America and then some, even if everyone drove plug ins( disposal?-we need to find a way to use the waste or safely send it to space- spend tax money on researching that) once we have the nuke plants set up fill in with nano solar( http://www.nanosolar.com ), for powering our cars and w.e. makes your bill cheaper eventually. electrolysis could also become fossil fuel independent with nuclear power so hydrogen cars could become the new oil combustion engine, what do u guys think

Answer 1

Let me start off by saying we (my family and I) live 100% off of the grid and are completely self-sufficient with a 0% Carbon footprint. I believe this is the first step anyone can make “help the environment”. Once you convert your own life style to a greener more eco friendly route, you can start helping others.

Alternative Fuels, also known as non-conventional fuels, are any materials or substances that can be used as a fuel, other than conventional fuels. Conventional fuels include: fossil fuels (petroleum (oil), coal, propane, & natural gas), & also in some instances nuclear materials such as uranium. Some well known alternative fuels include biodiesel, ethanol, butanol, chemically stored electricity (batteries & fuel cells), hydrogen, methane, natural gas, vegetable oil, biomass, & peanut oil.

Now alternative (or renewable) energy is a little different…

Renewable energy flows involve natural phenomena such as sunlight, wind, tides & geothermal heat. Each of these sources has unique characteristics which influence how & where they are used.

Short but sweet that’s the specifics of it. If you’re interested in using some form of alternative fuel or renewable energy in your vehicle or home, feel free to contact me. I live 100% off the grid on alternative energy and have converted many vehicles to run on biodiesel, ethanol, hydrogen and EV.

In fact I currently run 2 trucks, my home hot water heater, home stove and home generator on hydrogen and one car is EV. I offer step by step DIY guides to walk anyone threw the process if you’re interested. You can find them at

www agua-luna com

Hope this helped, feel free to contact me personally if you have any questions if you’d like assistance in making your first self sufficient steps, I’m willing to walk you step by step threw the process. I’ve written several how-to DIY guides available at  www agua-luna com on the subject. I also offer online and on-site workshops, seminars and internships to help others help the environment.

Dan Martin

Alterative Energy / Sustainable Consultant, Living 100% on Alternative & Author of How One Simple Yet Incredibly Powerful Resource Is Transforming The Lives of Regular People From All Over The World... Instantly Elevating Their Income & Lowering Their Debt, While Saving The Environment by Using FREE ENERGY... All With Just One Click of A Mouse...For more info Visit:  

www AGUA-LUNA com

Stop Global Warming!!!

Answer 2

Due to a steadily rising gas price in 2008 with the US national average price per gallon of regular unleaded gas above $4.00, there has been a steady movement towards developing higher fuel efficiency and more alternative energy vehicles for consumers. In response, many smaller companies have rapidly increased research and development into radically different ways of powering consumer vehicles. While Hybrid Vehicles (such as Toyota's Prius) and Electric Vehicles (such as the Tesla Roadster) are commercially available, other technologies such as fuel cells, flywheels, ultracapacitors and a Water-Powered car are starting to emerge as viable options.

energy fuelled in ways that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment

energy derived from sources that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment.

energy derived from nontraditional sources (e.g., compressed natural gas, solar, hydroelectric, wind)

energy that is not popularly used and is usually environmentally sound, such as solar or wind energy (as opposed to fossil fuels)

Fuel sources that are other than those derived from fossil fuels. Typically used interchangeably for renewable energy. Examples include: wind, solar, biomass, wave and tidal energy.

Answer 3

hmm, your solution to fuel crisis is to go to war for oil and then create huge nuclear plants which would make great targets for the people you are at war with?   not sure the best solution to getting rid of nuclear waste is to fire it into space.  apart from the space junk issue, i dont think it could ever be 100% safe and then what happens when the rocket explodes on take off (its happened plenty of times)  of course you could always launch the rocket from the country you invaded to get the oil from in the first place :-)

Answer 4

Ummm... am I the only one here who finds something totally morally bankrupt and ethically irresponsible in this issue?

I feel like I just fell in a bathtub of slime...

Sorry, guys, but you have all started to discuss the practicalities and economic issues of the ideas of someone who advocates staying at war in order to satisfy the inefficient and greedy needs of Americans.

1 - There cannot be possibly be any justification for the US to be consuming 2-3X as much oil per capita as Western European countries; standards and costs of living are simply not that far apart

2 - War = death, murder, misery, poverty, increase in terrorism, suffering, disease, etc.

Innocent civilians, especially women and children, are the main victims of war. How dare you say it is OK to condemn millions - millions! - of innocent people to this sort of tragedy just so you can run your airconditioner or drive a big car to compensate for some physical or mental smallness?

"you need to fight for what you want'?

Basically, this would entail an occupation of the oil producing countries of the world, subjugating and oppressing the population.

Such a population may respond along the lines of:

“Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God [Allah!] who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.”

And decide that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations... evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such [forces]..."

What goes around comes around

As ye sew, so shall ye reap

If the USA decides to 'stay at war' for oil then it will have thrown away its last moral right to be considered a world leader

Again, apologies if this is a bit over the top but I have been to fifteen conflict zones and have seen what war does up close and personal.

Answer 5

I don't think polluting space would be such a smart idea.

A) We could upset some other species out there when our junk crashes into their planet.

B) Space junk might come back at us and damage our satellites or planet and/or hit an asteroid/meteor and send it off its usual course and cause damage somewhere else (the earlier mentioned possible other species) if not to Earth.

Answer 6

Your close,spent Nuclear fuel rods could be shot at the sun.The sun is the biggest source of radiation and it would melt even before it got there.Its so d**n heavy it would be very impractible to do this at the moment.But it would not pollute space as someone has said.

As far as alternative energies,only Nuclear can compete with Oil,the rest,wind solar,geo thermal,have limited participation and are subsidized by the Government(subsidized means they cannot make it on their own and have to be implemented in programs because they couldnt survive in a free market) so they are impractible.

Oil is abundant yet we wont drill it.People say it wont make the price go down and it will take 10 years for us to see any change,yet it would take alternative the same amount of time and it would be more expensive than drilling

still Opec feeds the liberal ideals,the environmentalists lobbies so we wont drill our own oil .Global warming at the hands of man is a myth(DR Roy Spencer) look him up and youll see the arrogance of man made global warming believers.

Answer 7

Solar ( Sun )

Hidro-Electryc

Atomic

Answer 8

Sorry but for the most part I think you are wrong (I am an energy strategist).

Nuclear: plants need 10 years commissioning and have an economic life time of 40-60 years. This means that if you plan a plant now its half life-time will be in 35 years.

What is the probability that solar power will be at the same price or cheaper than nuclear in less than 35 years? It is extremely high. Why? because nuclear power has increasing cost for the fuel (as more nations use nuclear power) and cost for the reactors not decreasing. At the same time the solar power has an extremely high "learning rate" (its price decreases fast with the time and the quantity produced).

So you would send the society in a solution which is worse in terms of costs and environment. This is because you base the decision for the future without looking at future development or even on an entire static vision.