Why don't we fully convert to solar power and other good energy setups

May 24, 2017, 11:50 am

Agree30 Disagree21

59%
41%

The debate "Why don't we fully convert to solar power and other good energy setups" was started by neveralone on May 24, 2017, 11:50 am. 30 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 21 people are on the disagree side. That might be enough to see the common perception. It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.

neveralone posted 2 arguments, Christian posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
ceedotrock posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.

Shally_Pally, Christian, M3phisto, football, DiabolikIzzy, officiallsse, thecommunistmanifesto and 23 visitors agree.
The13yearoldconservative, ceedotrock, amS07 and 18 visitors disagree.

Obviously, there would have to be a proper balance between systems, geothermal, wind, solar and etc. Neglecting these technologies due to fear of their affects is narrow minded. When our current systems of energy production cause havoc on the enviorment and are not limitless. The abilities of our current renewable energy options currently is limited, because they are new. Within time and dedication they will advance, energy storage and efficency. This happened with sources like coal over time. Which started out killing people from pollution and covering everything in soot and smog. Now a days coal no longer does this and has been made efficient by use. I'm not saying coal is a perfected technology, I'm merely using it as an example of what could happen to renewable technology. Making it even more important that we switch to better energy sources soon.

2 days, 5 hours ago

I'd say you need to balance the available types you have. nuclear, solar, geothermal, hyroelectric, and wind. but not coal. f*** coal. we seriously NEED to stop using that shit. but there is no 1 answer to this. I think the biggest problem facing the energy sector is our general inability to store energy in any effecient manner. I have a cursory understanding of what's holding us back on this front but common. we've been using lithium ion batterys I think for 20 years now? this can't be the epitome of energy storage technology.

1 week, 1 day ago

Soon enough...bt not now because it's not reliable enough to produce sufficient energy that we need like our daily resources. There are several adoption of solar power plant development in various country but not to the full extend of productivity because of the weather change and other reasons.

4 weeks, 1 day ago

there have been 99 significant nuclear accidents since 1952. 57 of these have been since Chernobyl. saying there have only been 2 bad situations isn't truthful. there have only been a few catastrophic incidents. but alot of other incidents too.

nuclear is actually really expensive. it is not a cost efficient option. they cost billions to build and maintain. and if you skimp on any of these costs you can potentially cause a nuclear catastrophe. solar and wind power get more cost effective every year. nuclear energy has no future. anyone still trying build them is wasting their money.

1 month, 2 weeks ago

well at least there is no accidents involving CANDU reactors

1 month, 2 weeks ago
ceedotrock
replied to...

Chernobyl was one out of how many 2 bad situations that gave nuclear a bad name? its a shame nuclear is def the answer.

1 month, 2 weeks ago

because its literally NOT possible and not economically sound unless u want ur power shutting of every 29 seconds. As of right now It actually has cost consumers FAR moire than it has saved them. Do some research besides watching the news. Maybe in the future.

1 month, 2 weeks ago

Because nuclear power is cheaper right now. Let one scientist find a cheaper way and be sure that all energy industry will change immediately.

3 months, 3 weeks ago

I agree solar power is reliable but unless we develop advanced batteries to store energy for later, it's not going to happen

3 months, 3 weeks ago

Because it is not as efficient as you think. The most powerful solar panel I could find has en efficiency of 20%. If you want green energy look to nuclear power but Chernobyl showed us the risk.

3 months, 3 weeks ago

nuclear energy

3 months, 4 weeks ago
neveralone
replied to...

true. I would want better systems (was going to say obviously but realized it wasn't obvious.haha) so that we could but as of now we seem content with what we got. I would rather propel us into better times than being in ok at best times.

3 months, 4 weeks ago
PsychDave
replied to...

Even there we have issues with reliability. In windy areas, it is often windier during some parts of the year. Too windy, and it damages equipment. No windy enough and you don't get enough power.

There is also ecological concerns with renewable energy as well. Solar needs large areas to collect. That means wildlings 8n the area will be impacted. Wind turbines make noise, which can disturb people and wildlife. There is a cost and a benefit to every technology, the trick is balancing the two.

We absolutely should be phasing into renewable energy, but we just aren't able to fully rely on it yet.

3 months, 4 weeks ago
neveralone
replied to...

u play to ur strengths. for windy places windmills, deserts solar and ect.

3 months, 4 weeks ago

Solar power is unreliable. There's no saying the weather can be consistent, and too much energy received unprepared for can put a severe cost on the energy companies. That isn't to mention the cost of producing the materials, which will not be made with solar power but these other sources.

At least, solar power has these issues. The other bit would be the inefficient conversion to energy. Though, the details are a bit difficult to parse with differences in use and creation.

3 months, 4 weeks ago
Discuss "Why don't we fully convert to solar power and other good energy setups" politics science technology
Add an argument!
Use the arrow keys to navigate between statements. Press "A" to agree and press "D" to disagree.