Discuss the conventional alternatives to fossil fuels.

Photovoltaic solar energy (solar panels) - PRO- no CO2 emmisions and no pollution CON- chemicals used to make solar cells

Solar water heating - PRO- sun heats water, reducing the amount of electricity made from fossil fuels that are used CON- nothing really

Bio fuels - PRO- it's easily renewable and the plants that are grown take CO2 out of the atmosphere CON- how much energy is used to make it? there are disputes about this, some calculations say you come out ahead some say you loose energy.

Hydropower - PRO- no CO2 emission CON- dams destroy the environment where they are built and keep nutrient from reaching farther downstream, causing a buildup of the nutrients within the dam

Natural hydropower (Building water wheels that are turned by natural tides no man made water preasure)- PRO- minimal disturbance to the natural environment and no pollution CON- I've yet to learn of one

Hydrogen (don't know much about it)- PRO- only bi product is water CON- tech not as good?

Wind energy- PRO- no pollution CON- kills many birds and produce a loud keening sound (wind farms individual windmills aren't as bad)

On a global scale we basically have only five options

Nuclear Fission

- Pros - Proven Technology, Sufficiently Capable of replacing our current electrical power needs, clean if all radioactive waste is disposed of completely.
- Cons - Moderately Expensive, At least a thousand times more dangerous if radiation leaks and potentially very dangerous as the nuclear waste stockpile increases. Bad for nuclear proliferation.

Solar Power

- Pros - Completely clean technology. Will never run out of "fuel" in the relevant future. Very safe and unlikely to cause any health problems.
- Cons - Most Expensive. Economically and technologically impractical when compared to fossil fuels. Inconsistent (Useless during cloud cover and at night) and as such requires a backup form of power.

Wind Power

- Pros - Completely clean technology. Will never run out of "fuel" in the relevant future. Very safe if close to the ground and unlikely to cause health problems. Is slightly less expensive than solar power.
- Cons - Still relatively expensive. Economically and technologically impractical when compared to fossil fuels. Inconsistent and only semi-predictable and as such requires a backup form of power.

Biofuels

- Pros - Potentially cheap form of solar power through photosynthesis. Capable of storing power effectively in the form of whatever fuel being produced. Algal fuel is biofuel's only real hope but if it becomes practical it could revolutionize world economies.
- Cons - Currently more expensive by a wide margin. Requires a massive amount of farmland (as in bigger than the continental United States) unless algal fuel becomes practical. Doesn't decrease the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere although it doesn't increase it either (carbon neutral).

Nuclear Fusion

Pros - Potentially the greatest source of power possible. Can literally use water (or the hydrogen inside it) as an incredibly powerful power source. "half a bathtub of seawater could theoretically create the energy equivalent of 40 train cars of coal." And it doesn't produce any nuclear waste and is as such clean.
- Cons - Expensive doesn't begin to describe how economically impractical it currently is. Requires intense amounts of energy and highly advanced technology. Given current methods it requires more energy to instigate the reaction than one can get from it. Unproven technology. Still quite dangerous if a containment leak occurs as radiation is still present during the reaction itself.

Discussion continued here: https://biology-forums.com/index.php?topic=262473