How is using of different energy effects our community or country?

Question

is there any sides that i can research about the using of energy

Answer 1

well for conventional oil it has a high net energy yield compared to other types of energy. the technology is already well developed. But of course, it pollutes the air with vast amount of CO2.

Oil Shale/Oil Sand: large potential supplies. easily transported from country to country. but it has a very high cost and a very low net energy yield. It also requires a lot of water to mine for and has severe land disruption risks from mining. And of course it pollutes the air of CO2.

Natural Gas: low cost (w/ subsidies), less air pollution from fossil fuels. But it's difficult to transport over long distances and has to shipped over across the oceans as LNG which is highly explosive.

Coal: we have a large supply (especially the United States). and the technology is already well-developed. BUT of course...severe land disruption, severe threat to human health, releases mercury into the air when burned along with CO2 emissions.

Synthetic Fuels: large potential supplies, lower air pollution when burned. But it has a low net energy yield, it's more expensive than coal is, requires coal to be made, and has higher CO2 emissions than coal.

Nuclear: low environmental supplies (without accidents), moderate land use, emits 1/6 as less of CO2 compared to coal. But it has a low net energy yield, high environmental impact when there ARE accidents, there's no widely acceptable way to store radioactive wastes.

Passive/Active Solar Energy: it's free, moderate to high net energy yield, no CO2 emissions. but you need access to the sun 60% of the time, it needs constant maintenance.

Solar Energy: moderate net energy yield, no CO2 emissions. But it has low efficiency, high cost, DC currents must be converted to AC currents, needs a backup system, needs access to the sun a majority of the time. the production of photovoltaic cells releases toxins in the air such as mercury and other heavy metals.

Large-scale hyropower: moderate net energy, high efficiency, long life-span, no CO2 emissions, reservoir can be used as recreation. But it has high construction costs, high impact for the flood land on the reservoir, CO2 emissions from Biomass decay, danger of collapse, uproots people from their homes, decreses harvest ability downstream of the dam.

Wind Power: moderate net energy, low cost (& it's falling still), no CO2 emissions, easily expanded, can be located out in the sea, the land below can still be used. However steady winds are needed for it to work, so-called "visual" pollution, may interfere with wild birds.

Solid Biomass: large potential supply in some regions, moderate costs, no net CO2 increase if harvested and sustained, Plantation can be on semi-arid land, can help restore degraded lands. But it can have a high environmental impact, CO2 emissions if harvested unresponsibly, soil erosion...plantations could compete with croplands

Ethanol/Methanol: high octane, SOME reduction in CO2, high net energy, potentially renewable. But a large fuel tank is required, lower driving range, low net energy if it comes from corn, may compete with food croplands, high Nitrous Oxide emissions, corrosive, and hard to start if the weather is cold.

Biodiesel: lowered CO, CO2, and hydrocarbon emissions, high net yield energy from certain crops, potentially renewable. But it costs a lot, low yield from other crops (such as soy), competes with food croplands, degradation of biodiversity from crop plantations, hard to start in cold weather.

Geothermal Energy: highly efficient, moderate net energy from accessible sights, low land use, moderate environmental impact. But there aren't a lot of accessible sites, CO2 emissions, depleted source if harvested rapidly.

Hydrogen: can be produced from water, low environmental impact, renewable if produced from renewable sources, no CO2 emissions, good potential substitute for oil, safer than gasoline or natural gas, nontoxic, high efficiency in fuel cells. But hydrogen is not found naturally in nature, energy is needed to produce the fuel, negative net energy yield, water vapor is potentially a worse greenhouse gas since water can bond with many other things in the atmosphere, no fuel distribution system, H2 leaks deplete ozone in the atmosphere.  

  

Hope that helps with your question~