Wind power or solar power?
Windmills are not very effective. To run one average school you would need 50, 100ft windmills (blades), also some places are not very windy.
In order to power a school with solar you need to cover the roof, still not effective ( pays itself off then needs replacement) but better than wind power.
Solar for domestic production, at least here in California. For larger scale production I believe wind power has the advantage.
Solar. When we went to Hawaii for a couple weeks, those ugly windmills were ruining the beautiful view of a mountain over the ocean. At least if they put solar panels on the mountain, they would be flat and a bit less noticeable.
Wind turbines both fascinate me and creep me out. We saw miles and miles of them in Kansas and Colorado.
Hamsters and wheels, man!
Both are a blight on the landscape. Both are too expensive and inefficient.
The solar panels look great in our parking lots and provide excellent shade cover for our cars in the hot Arizona sun.
Everytime I go by those big wind things, they're never spinning. Are they still working? and if the sun isn't shining I don't know if I am getting power. So basically I dunno.
So far in 2013 I've paid $3.13 to the power company. Go solar.
We have thousands of wind turbines within a 50 mile radius of my home. Very windy state, lots of energy harnessed!
Yes, they are
Neither is viable.
Neither can be affordable used in place of fossil fuel, as much as this administration tells us it is. Maybe someday they will, but currently not close.
Well then if take that attitude it will never happen. People probably thought the same thing of those giant computers back in the 60's and 70's but you are thankful now someone spent all that money.
Yes. They spent money, known as capital. They took a risk and succeeded. With solar and wind powered energy, it's our tax payer $$ being used by the government to push a liberal agenda. Meanwhile they have crushed the coal industry.
Yeah it's totally a liberal idea to be have renewable energy... Who else would want that?!? As a non-liberal I'm offended. Coal won't be around forever, at some point in the future there will be no coal workers. How about having multiple skill sets?
When technology allows for it to be a cost effective alternative, fine. Until then, improve upon the existing resources.
Do you use solar or wind at your home?
I have several portable solar devices which I use on as many devices as possible. Unfortunately I live in an apt. complex that won't allow me to have large panels. I will be buying a home in the next 12 months and have saved $10000 to put to solar.
Do you think you will save money over traditional resources?
I have a solar powered calculator, that's my commitment for now.
I'd rather throw my money towards something that will be viable forever instead of an endless money pit.
In the long term I know it's an investment that will save me money. At least until the sun explodes, but we won't be here so I don't have to worry about that.
I don't agree that you will capitalize on this investment, maybe ever. I respect your right to invest in this technology, but I don't want the government using tax payer $$ to push it on us and lie about its benefits.
Well then we will both be in the same boat since you won't ever personally gain a profit by using oil and coal. At least I'll have a better conscious using something that can't be depleted in the next 500 years, and that's being conservative.
Oil and coal will only become more expensive, renewables will only become cheaper.
I respect your right to put your money towards a bottomless pit. Might as well just burn your dollars to heat your home. Who exactly do you think should pay for renewables to become viable or do you think we should scrap the idea altogether?
I can agree that renewables will probably become more affordable in the future. Fossil fuels will not get more expensive if the government stays out of it. More oil and coal reserves are being located. I'm comfortable that it is sustainable for a
Long time. I'm not sure where either of us is directly profiting from either source. My "profit" comes from paying lower costs than current renewable technology allows.
I think the free market should prevail. Let profit seekers develop the technologies.
If it will ever be viable, they will make it happen, far faster and more efficiently than the government.
You just said that I won't make any money by putting up solar panels, yet the free market will somehow make a profit? This logic alludes me.
You don't make a profit by using the product. Investors in companies that develop the technologies, would hopefully realize a profit. If you think it's viable and want to reap a profit, you should invest your money in it.
Hahahahahahahahah. That's what I think of this whole conversation. Eventually I will make money just off what I SAVE on everything else. Without that little hitch, no one would buy solar panels. I am the investor. I am the free market. Now I'm done.
I don't equate savings with profit. As for your exasperation with this conversation, I'm not aware of anything I said that was insulting. We have opposing view points. That said. I will take this jab at you. You said you are a non-liberal. You are
Absolutely a liberal.
A combination of several alternative sources.
Both could do with more development but id say solar
Neither are viable here.
Have you ever been to eastern washington? Tons of wind farms literally as far as you can see in places
I have. No amount of wind farms across the mountains will ever make them viable here.
We can build rain farms (called hydroelectric dams) but neither sun nor wind will work here.
Out of the two choices I chose solar. At least solar does not kill Bald Eagles and other birds.
Thats why i chose solar, but we need both, the impact on birds is currently minimal compared to that of nonalternative energy sources but there needs to be better thought of that
Depends. Wind power in a tornado. Solar power in the desert.
How about neither....
The alternative to neither being?
diversity is the key! more than both.... wind, solar, oil (bio and petro) wave energy ... Any possible source of energy generation except nuclear until we find a way to make nuclear waste inert.
Look up thorium.
Or just build breeder reactors.
Solar-powered house :)
That runs out in the next couple hundred years. Solar won't be out for billions.
Solar although Obama could power one wind machine on his own
Well technically wind is a form a solar energy because it's caused by the sun unevenly heating the air.
Well technically everything except nuclear is solar energy then.
Wind Power ---> Climate Change.
Both, where each is appropriate.
The only place a wind farm would work is surrounding Washington DC because the people we collectively send to DC suck thus creating a constant breeze of BS.
You put some thought in to that didn't you! Followed
This is the best comment on here.
I love those wind turbines. I think they're so cool. A field of them is mesmerizing and beautiful. :)
The blades are occasionally transported through my town on trains, on flat-bed cars. It's a pretty amazing sight.
The only place wind power can compete with solar power is Washington DC.
Neither work to any sufficiency
Neither. How about oil?
okay, but when that oil runs out have fun deciding neither. I wish you luck because you're gonna need it.
FYI - Solar also includes simple systems that heat oil or liquid. This could be parabolic metal mirror heating oil used to heat water to drive turbines or systems that use the heat directly. Water or steam heaters are also in this category.
They both have intermittency issues, so they can't support a grid by themselves. The most promising is probably offshore wind power; it's had a lot of success in parts of Europe.
It depends on which one is cheapest.
At least solar power doesn't harm anyone in its harvest.
Neither are efficient. Out of the chives I say solar. It at least. Can supplement. Traditional energy on a small scale
Plus where are we gonna get the money? Are we just gonna pull it out of our butts?
Obama doesn't let money get in the way.
Wind turbines are expensive, noisy, an eyesore, kills birds, and if the wind stops blowing what do we do? Fire up a coal burning plant that's sitting there waiting? Oh wait no, everyone just hates the coal plants so there gonna be out of business!!
The wind never stops in Wyoming
We'll news flash: it does in other places!
Wind systems require fast generators for c when the wind doesn't blow, even if it is for 20 seconds, and that includes WY. This makes wind extremely expensive and inefficient until we have grid based storage and a smarter grid
kairu, just accept the facts. PV is too expensive for utilities at the moment, which is changing, but solar is now a good home investment and business investment.
Turn Wyoming into a wind farm. You can't live there. I tried.
They are both bad. Solar panels are extremely expensive, and if it's cloudy we can't just have cities without power and start waiting, singing rain rain go away!
Yes solar panels are expensive but when people in remote villages receive a solar panel from some NGO the first thing they buy is a TV they can afford one because they make millions of them.
Wind power kills lots of birds.
They are both different forms of solar power. Oil, weather, sun etc. Ocean currents are partially from wind, gravity of moon and momentum of earths spin.
The mass of water is also good for doing a lot of hard work.
They say traditional solar and wind compliment each other. When its cloudy, the wind is usually blowing.
If I was gonna pick I would do a private solar setup as far as a large scale operation solar is prob. the better option there to.
seems like turbines are causing some damage to wildlife
I live in Alaska. There isn't a lot of sun power most of the year...
Wind power is inefficient and kills birds. Solar is just inefficient.
Solar has numerous environmental contaminants in panels
It depends on the solar technology. Some have no toxins, others do.
Solar has far more potential, as soon as they get the efficiency up.
Wind power is awesome especially if you live near Washington D.C. ;-)
Solar no doubt. There simply isn't enough wind in the world.
Wind companies have a higher profit margin I believe
I believe you. Solar just isn't developed enough yet. Solar is not the best investment for today, but the future belongs to solar.
Hello please follow me for daily polls that you will enjoy!
Don't spam the main polls. If you want followers, contribute to discussion and people will follow you. Just give it time :)