|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 22, 2007 23:53:24 GMT -6
We must each do our part! From changing all our lightbulbs to Incandescent Lightbulbs (I'm trying to convince my parents , to simple things like reusing our old paper bags; I use mine to collect my dogs *you know what*. Hehe. Most paper is farmed, trees are grown with the sole reason to be cut down and turned into paper, the cutting of the amazon trees are used for homes and wooden flooring and wooden tables and such. It doesn't have to be incandescent (they have their own down side, like mercury which can cause cancer should you get in direct contact with it), just get bulbs that use a lower wattage. The lower the wattage, the less energy that it uses. The same goes for anything that you plug into a wall socket, lights, TV, stereo, Microwave, Hair Drier, everything. And most things have the wattage posted on them. (note: the lower the wattage, the less energy it uses so although it can save energy, it also takes longer use to achieve the same results)
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 23, 2007 11:02:48 GMT -6
I'm curious to see what everyone thinks about different types of alternative fuels.
Solar Wind Hydro Nuclear Corn Biodeasel Algae Biodeasel Salt Water (resently on the news, look for bunring salt water on youtube)
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 23, 2007 11:48:40 GMT -6
I think that renewable energy is a must; and eventually we could stop using Coal power, and other un-clean ways of power.
Solar, and Wind power are probally one of the best ways that we should be able to produce power. I'll check the video, and post later.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 23, 2007 12:36:49 GMT -6
Personally, I want to see people question these (I'm not saying that they're bad, but they all have good sides and they all have bad sides). I would like to see some people look into what are the good sides and the bad sides. Solar and Wind have cost and efficentcy issues, Hydro effects the enviroment in a negative way, Nuclear has safty concerns, and biodeasel still resleases CO2 when burned. They go much more indepth than just that, but that's all I'll post for now.
|
|
|
Post by harisstavr on Oct 23, 2007 13:21:16 GMT -6
hmmm I will agree with Zach. Solar and Wind Power are the best ways to produce energy nowadays although it costs. But let me ask sth. What do we have to concern more? Preserving our natural habitat? or spending money on some Solar Villages and Wind Generators? I think the Answer is easy
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 23, 2007 13:54:38 GMT -6
hmmm I will agree with Zach. Solar and Wind Power are the best ways to produce energy nowadays although it costs. But let me ask sth. What do we have to concern more? Preserving our natural habitat? or spending money on some Solar Villages and Wind Generators? I think the Answer is easy But there are other options than just spending money on Solar Villages. Nuclear has no CO2 emissions, Geothermal has no CO2 emissions, Hydro and Tidal is likewise, and these all work around the clock, unlike Solar and Wind. Why is it that you like Solar and Wind over some of the other options? Personally I like Solar because it has no emissions at all that might, at some later date, be found to be bad for the enviroment. And there are some easy solutions to the fact that the sun doesn't shine all day, and these solutions have other benefits that if the power goes out, you still have power for weeks until you run out.
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 23, 2007 15:36:34 GMT -6
I agree with u, guys, alternative energies are a must that should start been used NOW! I think solar and hydrogen energies are our best options. Solar has no emissions at all, like oregonelephant said, which is what we're aiming for: stop climate change caused by man. Hydrogen energy works great for cars, has been tested in BMWs, and has water as a waste product! Thus, it would be just perfect for places where there is a lack of water. Hydrogen in cars, if not properly secure, could make the car err.. explode, but what engineers are doing now is strenghtening the motor so nothing like that happens . I would also go for wind energy, but it may have noise polution if held near populated areas! And nuclear power could be absolutely disastrous if proper measures are not taken. Also, it does have waste products, mainly radioactive chemicals. And we don't want more radioactivity, do we? Life would turn like a sci-fi story where humans flee to outerspace because the Earth is too radioactive.. . Good point bringing alternatives energies into the thread, oregonelephant, karma's up!
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 23, 2007 16:07:28 GMT -6
I agree with u, guys, alternative energies are a must that should start been used NOW! I think solar and hydrogen energies are our best options. Solar has no emissions at all, like oregonelephant said, which is what we're aiming for: stop climate change caused by man. Hydrogen energy works great for cars, has been tested in BMWs, and has water as a waste product! Thus, it would be just perfect for places where there is a lack of water. Hydrogen in cars, if not properly secure, could make the car err.. explode, but what engineers are doing now is strenghtening the motor so nothing like that happens . I would also go for wind energy, but it may have noise polution if held near populated areas! And nuclear power could be absolutely disastrous if proper measures are not taken. Also, it does have waste products, mainly radioactive chemicals. And we don't want more radioactivity, do we? Life would turn like a sci-fi story where humans flee to outerspace because the Earth is too radioactive.. . Good point bringing alternatives energies into the thread, oregonelephant, karma's up! Nuclear is not as bad as it used to be. One cannot look at the old USSR as evidence, becuase they completely ignored the safty in hopes of out doing the USA. France has been useing nuclear energy for many years as their main sourse of power, with no mishaps at all, none. They've never even needed to evacuate a single plant, because there might have been an issue.
|
|
|
Post by Ranjith arun on Oct 24, 2007 2:38:24 GMT -6
ya, I agree with you oregon....
Nuclear power can be used constructively and it should necessarily be the best resource to fulfill the needs....
but then we have problems like improper use of it in certain ways...
coz in this world Nations rarely trust each other, right?
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 24, 2007 6:47:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by darkme on Oct 26, 2007 11:07:23 GMT -6
Hey, Here's a cool site about Climate Change I just found, it's in an easy way and it's like for kids... Lol, well I was searching online cuz I'm gonna do my public speaking about Global Warming and I loved the site since I got what they were saying here's the link: epa.gov/climatechange/kids/cc.html
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 11:43:22 GMT -6
That's basically the same as Tidal Power (just utillizes it in a different way), But these are hard to install and maintain. They have to be built far enough out, so that large ships don't accidently run them over, and they have to be built strong enough to withstand the preasure of that depth. That will cut into it's effiecentcy. But I definately believe that this has a strong foot in for a spot in the future as a source of power.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 26, 2007 12:01:03 GMT -6
Exactly! We need to have allot of different power sources for future generations! What would happen if we run out of coal for oil? We'll HAVE TO switch to alternative fuel
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 12:05:11 GMT -6
So what are your views to other power sources? How do you think of...
1) Solar
2) Wind
3) Tidal
4) Nuclear
5) Geothermal
6) Biodeasel
7) Burning Salt Water
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 26, 2007 12:14:19 GMT -6
1) Solar I think this is probally the easiest, yet most expensive (?) way of power.
2) Wind I think this is one of the best, but some people do complain about the noise, as Victoria said.
3) Tidal I agree, this would be pretty hard, but I think it should be used for islands in the South Pacific, with funding from UN agencies or NGOs.
4) Nuclear To tell you the truth, I'm not exactly sure abotu Nuclear. I think it should be used, but there is a risk that something bad could happen!
5) Geothermal People are starting to use Geothermal heat here in Wisconsin to heat their homes! I think this is a great idea, but we should have restrictions on it, so all of it is not used up.
6) Biodeasel Like corn? Well, there are positives and negatives for that. Some complain that corn prices are raising because there aren't as many farmers farming corn for people to eat. But, I think this is a great way to run our cars; now we just need the car companies to go ahead with it!
7) Burning Salt Water I'm not exactly sure that this is right. Air pollution could be a problem, and I'm sure it would probally smell for the people living nearby!
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 14:30:57 GMT -6
1) Solar - I believe that this is the most promising energy source. In the last 30 years it's efficentcy has gone up over 500% (estimated to double every 8 years). It is very expensive to impliment it on a large scale, but the price has been dropping almost as fast as the efficentcy has been going up.
2) Wind - Wind is a very clean energy source and it's cheap (always a plus). But wind is too wild to be able to tame, the sun comes out everyday (in the desert and over the oceans), but there is no way to know when the wind will blow again.
3) Tidal - I really like, but they are still researching it and finding out all it's aspects, so it hasn't caught up yet to be known if it is a strong possibility, even though it is looking like it.
4) Nuclear - It is the most effective and 2nd most powerful, but there is a high risk. There isn't much byproduct from them (the nuclear waste can be recycled and reused), the the risk of an incident like Chernobyl is always remembered.
5) Geothermal - First, this powersource won't run out for tens of thousands of years if it were to power all of the world. But, it does release heat from within the Earth to the atmosphere, so there is always the concern, could this warm the Earth aswell as green house gases?
6) Biodeasel - From corn is almost useless, but from grass and algae can be used on a large scale. I don't like it as an electric power sourse, but I love it for being put in your car. Because when it is burned, it still produces CO2.
7) Burning Salt Water - just youtube this and I'll let you tell me what you think, but it has no emissions except water.
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 26, 2007 15:30:04 GMT -6
You forgot hydrogen.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 16:30:07 GMT -6
You forgot hydrogen. I really don't like useing any explosive gas, that is a gas by nature. Oil and gasoline are liquids by nature. H2 can spread through a room at speeds of 700+ mph, in all directions and around all obsticles, than ignite. It's just too instable compared to how much energy it produces for me.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 29, 2007 15:37:25 GMT -6
So... is there anyone here who disagrees with Global Warming, and thinks it's just a theory?
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 29, 2007 15:56:03 GMT -6
So... is there anyone here who disagrees with Global Warming, and thinks it's just a theory? To what point? In the sense that the news portrays it, yes, it is total BS. But in the aspect that they world is warming, it is caused by man, and it will have consequenses, it is most definately true. But the news blames everything on global warming at the time. After Katrina, the News said that we would have more numorous and more powerful hurricanes every year, well we haven't, we've had nill for hurricanes in the past 2 years, and so SC and GA have been have droughts from the lack of rain (which usually comes in as hurricanes), and they've been calling that global warming.
|
|