Which alternative fuels do you support?

  • Thread starter Mk
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Support
In summary: Bio is the scariest I think too :eek:Doesn't France get 80% of it's electricity from nuclear and export more of it?What percent of their total energy usage comes from nuclear, including petro energy?QED
  • #1
Mk
2,043
4
There's solar, wind, fusion, fission, plant oil biofuels, biomass burning, hydroelectricity, tide & wave power, and more. There is much talk of fuels alternative to the old fossil fuels, which do you think are superior?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Fission.

kghjfhjh
 
  • #3
I have to support fission since it is the only one(other than solar, which needs to become more efficient for people to accept) that can be used for power anywhere on the globe.(Since fusion can't be used for power anywhere on Earth, at least not yet.)
 
  • #4
Solar seems to be taking off & it's decentralized
 
  • #5
Aye, I would have to go with fission as well.
 
  • #6
Fission, solar, fusion.
 
  • #7
cookies...
 
  • #8
They all sound good to me. Solar, Wind and Wave are great for some places that can accommodate them, and for everywhere else there's fission (and Fusion!?)
 
  • #9
I have a woodlot full of trees and an efficient wood stove. I am burning carbon that is currently in-cycle and that has not been sequestered for hundreds of millions of years.
 
  • #10
It's a no brainer - biodiesel is the solution.
 
  • #11
russ_watters said:
Fission.

kghjfhjh

Fission for everyone? You rightfully deleted the thread from the meltdown crank last week, but what about proliferation?
 
  • #12
Fission, fission, and more fission.
 
  • #13
Fission: Terrorism; proliferation of nuclear materials; too much regulation needed to build the plants in time; the public and will never allow it.

Never going to happen to a significant degree.
 
  • #14
Gasoline and dirty coal.
 
  • #15
I've always thought the best solution is a little of everything. Dependance on a single fuel can turn ugly, and they all have their up sides and downsides anyway.
 
  • #16
cyrusabdollahi said:
Gasoline and dirty coal.

:rofl::rofl:
 
  • #17
Ivan Seeking said:
Never going to happen to a significant degree.
Doesn't France get 80% of it's electricity from nuclear and export more of it?

Ivan Seeking said:
Fission: Terrorism
What did you say again when we had the following conversation?:
Mk said:
We should eventually convert to nuclear as the main energy source in the United States.
Ivan Seeking said:
The terrorists would love that
Mk said:
Oh, I suppose then that we should stop building skyscrapers too because they're such a good target.
 
  • #18
I've never been too scared of a nuclear war. it's a measure too grandiose and is sure to alienate and harm the attacker; I doubt a country would want to engage in nuclear war unless they have a suicide wish.

now bio-weapons... those scare the **** out of me.
 
  • #19
moe darklight said:
now bio-weapons... those scare the **** out of me.

Have they ever been used?
 
  • #20
A mixture of different energy sources would be the best solution. So as not to rely on only one thing.
 
  • #21
Mk said:
Have they ever been used?

yea, I know... but it's the silence of a bio-weapon that scares me. A virus can spread fast, not show any symptoms for weeks, and be next to impossible to trace to know who the attacker was.
 
  • #22
moe darklight said:
yea, I know... but it's the silence of a bio-weapon that scares me. A virus can spread fast, not show any symptoms for weeks, and be next to impossible to trace to know who the attacker was.
Well, I wasn't being offensive, I was just asking if they were really.

Bio is the scariest I think too :eek:
 
  • #23
Mk said:
Doesn't France get 80% of it's electricity from nuclear and export more of it?

What percent of their total energy usage comes from nuclear, including petro energy?
QED

What did you say again when we had the following conversation?:

So you don't see a difference between buildings and dirty bombs? Buildings are a target - you know, like nuclear reactors are a target - and not weapons.
 
Last edited:
  • #24
There are some viable alternatives, but I wish the world would focus on a few, rather than a huge amount.

Fusion, hydrogen cells combined with wind and solar power for the rich nations.
 
  • #25
The Uk could be powered by wave power and bio fuel.
 
  • #26
Mk said:
Doesn't France get 80% of it's electricity from nuclear and export more of it?
Ivan Seeking said:
What percent of their total energy usage comes from nuclear, including petro energy?
QED
70-something.

As for terrorists, come on.
 
  • #27
To defend Ivan, nuclear would not be so much a problem in this country. The problem is access to nuclear material in outside countries where the controls and transport are not as secure as over here.

The countries that need alternative fuel are mostly 3rd world countries because they are big polluters. Are you going to give them nuclear power plants? Umm, probably not.

Look at China, big time polluters. Would I want them using nuclear power? They can't even make safe consumer products, now there going to be safe with nuclear material? Yeah, right.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
cyrusabdollahi said:
The countries that need alternative fuel are mostly 3rd world countries because they are big polluters.
A lot of times people that are struggling to live don't have time to be nice to the environment, that's just how it goes.
Look at China, big time polluters. Would I want them using nuclear power?
What do you think about pebble-bed?
 
  • #29
moe darklight said:
yea, I know... but it's the silence of a bio-weapon that scares me. A virus can spread fast, not show any symptoms for weeks, and be next to impossible to trace to know who the attacker was.

like resident evil:confused::confused:
 
  • #30
Mk said:
A lot of times people that are struggling to live don't have time to be nice to the environment, that's just how it goes.

<shrug, that's tough for them.>


What do you think about pebble-bed?

I don't know what a pebble-bed is.
 
  • #31
mheslep said:
Fission for everyone? You rightfully deleted the thread from the meltdown crank last week, but what about proliferation?
Nuclear power in a country like the US is not a proliferation issue - we already have nuclear weapons. :rolleyes:
Ivan Seeking said:
Fission: Terrorism; proliferation of nuclear materials; too much regulation needed to build the plants in time; the public and will never allow it
The public is starting to wise-up to the fact that they were swindled by radical environmentalists into believing the anti-nuclear lies. Pro-nuke noise is starting to be made and I would be awfully surprised if it didn't make a big comeback in the next 20 years.

Most of the impediments are artificial, so there is no real reason why they can't be fixed.
 
  • #32
cyrusabdollahi said:
I don't know what a pebble-bed is.
Pebble bed is a technology where the fuel is contained in softball-sized balls in an energy density so low that it isn't possible for a runaway reaction and meltdown to occur.
 
  • #33
EV's and bio diesel (algae/used cooking oil/waste fat feed stock) for our cars. Wind, solar, and fission for our electricity. And on a complete fuel cycle for the fission source, not the BS of a cycle that we have today, thanks for the great policy Jimmy Carter.
 
  • #34
Fission. Fortunaly India and China doesn't seem to give a rats ass about anti nuclear fanatics. I hope China build every one of the 300 reactors they are aiming to build before 2050.

No other option has so far proven to be reliable and cheap for electricity production except biomass burning, but that isn't exactly polution free. Wasting to much money on wind is a inefficient way to replace coal.
Solar in the countries where it makes sense.

For vehicles Il go with anything aslong as its not ethanol or anything else made out of crops. Biodiesel perhaps aslong as we don't have to cut down to much wood. Lithium-ion batteries if electricity production can be increased cleanly to the levels needed.
 
  • #35
trajan22 said:
A mixture of different energy sources would be the best solution. So as not to rely on only one thing.

Agree. And the type of alternative source depends on the location. Whenever energy can be used with the least delivery cost, so much the better. Wave and tidal energy is there for the taking along coastal areas. (especially in places like Maine where they have HUGE tides). Photovoltaic and wind energy would be better used as a large number of smaller point sources (as opposed to huge arrays and wind farms) that are intertied to the grid (NO BATTERIES!). Solar hot water is really a no-brainer.

I'm optimistic that, as the costs of fuels increase, the demand for these sources will rise, and it will become commonplace fairly soon to see these features all over. In the Mystic (Connecticut) area, I'm seeing several million-dollar houses equipped with solar panels, and even a few wind turbines. Too bad there's a Hummer in those garages, though.
 
<h2>1. What are alternative fuels?</h2><p>Alternative fuels are any fuel sources that can be used as a substitute for traditional fossil fuels. They are typically renewable and have a lower impact on the environment.</p><h2>2. Why is it important to support alternative fuels?</h2><p>Supporting alternative fuels is important because it helps to reduce our dependence on non-renewable fossil fuels, which contribute to air pollution and climate change. Alternative fuels also have the potential to create new jobs and stimulate economic growth.</p><h2>3. What are some examples of alternative fuels?</h2><p>Some examples of alternative fuels include biofuels (such as ethanol and biodiesel), hydrogen, natural gas, electricity, and renewable diesel. Each of these fuels has unique properties and benefits.</p><h2>4. How do alternative fuels compare to traditional fossil fuels?</h2><p>Alternative fuels generally have a lower impact on the environment compared to traditional fossil fuels. They can also be more sustainable and cost-effective in the long run. However, the availability and infrastructure for alternative fuels may still be limited in some areas.</p><h2>5. How can I support the use of alternative fuels?</h2><p>There are several ways to support the use of alternative fuels, such as using alternative fuel vehicles, advocating for government policies that promote their use, and investing in companies and technologies that develop and produce alternative fuels. You can also make small changes in your daily life, such as using public transportation or carpooling, to reduce your own carbon footprint.</p>

1. What are alternative fuels?

Alternative fuels are any fuel sources that can be used as a substitute for traditional fossil fuels. They are typically renewable and have a lower impact on the environment.

2. Why is it important to support alternative fuels?

Supporting alternative fuels is important because it helps to reduce our dependence on non-renewable fossil fuels, which contribute to air pollution and climate change. Alternative fuels also have the potential to create new jobs and stimulate economic growth.

3. What are some examples of alternative fuels?

Some examples of alternative fuels include biofuels (such as ethanol and biodiesel), hydrogen, natural gas, electricity, and renewable diesel. Each of these fuels has unique properties and benefits.

4. How do alternative fuels compare to traditional fossil fuels?

Alternative fuels generally have a lower impact on the environment compared to traditional fossil fuels. They can also be more sustainable and cost-effective in the long run. However, the availability and infrastructure for alternative fuels may still be limited in some areas.

5. How can I support the use of alternative fuels?

There are several ways to support the use of alternative fuels, such as using alternative fuel vehicles, advocating for government policies that promote their use, and investing in companies and technologies that develop and produce alternative fuels. You can also make small changes in your daily life, such as using public transportation or carpooling, to reduce your own carbon footprint.

Similar threads

Replies
26
Views
949
Replies
8
Views
821
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • General Engineering
3
Replies
76
Views
11K
Replies
6
Views
939
  • Electrical Engineering
4
Replies
117
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
5
Views
759
Back
Top