Jump to content

The Dirty Secret of Clean Energy

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#16 Sphere


    The moth next to my brain is Bart, say hi to him if you like

  • Sponsor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,355 posts
  • Location:*tap* Behind ya!
  • Interests:I'm a Dutchy, that means I'm not a German (which doesn't sound/look the same to me!) also, being a Dutchy means I'm an idiot... sort off!

    And I def. need to get a real life again... I'm bored with my current life, ideas can be pm'd to me!
  • Country:Dutchyland

Posted 31 December 2008 - 02:20 AM

Just to add some oil to the fire...

You all do know by now that wind-energy, water-energy and nuclear-energy are polluting?
A short explenation (shout if I'm getting too technical)

Wind-energy uses the wind to produce energy, the logic here is, that energy never gets lost. Wind TRANSFERS it's energy to the windmill to make it spin round'n'round'n'round (you get the point).
This might seem very ecological, but the problem is, the wind looses it's energy.
In a mountain-area, it has the consequence of the wind being unable to move all the clouds over the mountains. Yes, this is true, a simple experiment will prove this!
Thus, the city's at the foot of the Rocky's, will be flooded, pretty much yearly, thanks too the few thousand wind-turbines that are placed in the line of it's wind-line (that part is a bit meteo, I don't know much about that)
You can probably imagine other problems to this.

Water energy has the same problem, but even worse. With lower water-speeds, fish can swim up the river way easier. You might say that that's not a problem, but it is. It will change the eco-system, because bears cannot catch fish anymore (they've already passed), humans cannot filter the water for daily use anymore (there's not enough oumph to the stream). (I can go on about this a very, very, very long time)

Nuclear power, well, I hope you all know the problems to that, but I still will point out the main problem: Waste storage.

You might think I'm seeing problems that don't exist, but trust me, I've been working on this for about two months for a large European energy company. These problems mentioned exist. Mainly the wind and water powersupply's really suck as future power-supply. For now, the only one I haven't found a real downside on is solar-power. But solar-power fails to fulfill the request.

(sorry for the long read, I got carried away and need another beer :roadrunner: )

#17 Nvyseal


    Chairman of the Board

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,797 posts
  • Location:From the whatever it is, Pluto
  • Country:USA

Posted 31 December 2008 - 05:17 AM

I'll be posting on this a little bit later

#18 stormrosson


    Established Member

  • Global Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,246 posts
  • Location:Silver City ,New Mexico
  • Interests:stuff
  • Country:yes

Posted 31 December 2008 - 04:45 PM

:roadrunner: yeah yeah , but at the very least wind/solar/ geothermal, energy sources are WAY LESS polluting/invasive than petroleum , really does anyone with a normally functioning brain even need this to be explained :RJsPC:oh and you are pretty much dead on Bill.....as usual :rofl_mini:

Edited by stormrosson, 31 December 2008 - 04:50 PM.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users